skip to main content
10.1145/3274694.3274733acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesacsacConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article
Public Access

Take It or Leave It: A Survey Study on Operating System Upgrade Practices

Published:03 December 2018Publication History

ABSTRACT

Software upgrades play a pivotal role in enhancing software performance, and are a critical component of resolving software bugs and patching security issues. However, consumers' eagerness to upgrade to the newest operating system is often tempered after release. In this paper, we focus on the upgrade perceptions and practices of users utilizing Microsoft Windows, with particular consideration given to the current upgrade cycle to Windows 10, which was, for a time, offered at no monetary cost to many users. To better understand the relevant factors for upgrade decisions, we deployed a structured survey, including several open-ended questions to add additional depth. We collected data from 239 Microsoft Windows users and utilized qualitative and quantitative methods to analyze user upgrade practices. Important themes include how to best notify users of upcoming upgrade opportunities, how users perceive privacy issues associated with OS upgrade decisions, and whether security constitutes a significant decision-making factor. We also explore how end-of-life dates, indicating the end of support by the vendor, are perceived by users.

References

  1. A. Acquisti and J. Grossklags. 2005. Privacy and rationality in individual decision making. IEEE Security & Privacy 3, 1 (2005), 26--33. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. D. Akhawe and A. P. Felt. 2013. Alice in Warningland: A Large-Scale Field Study of Browser Security Warning Effectiveness. In USENIX Security Symposium. 257--272. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. S. Anthony. 2015. Windows 10 doesn't offer much privacy by default: Here's how to fix it. Ars Technica (Aug 2015).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Apple Support. 2017. Apple security updates. (Sep 2017).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. B. Barrett. 2017. If you still use Windows XP, prepare for the worst. Wired (Jun 2017).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. S. Black and L. Lynch. 2001. How to compete: The impact of workplace practices and information technology on productivity. The Review of Economics and Statistics 83, 3 (2001), 434--445.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. D. Bradbury. 2016. Why we need better ATM security. Engineering & Technology 11, 1 (2016), 32--35.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. R. Buck, M. Khan, M. Fagan, and E. Coman. 2017. The user affective experience scale: A measure of emotions anticipated in response to pop-up computer warnings. International Journal of Human--Computer Interaction (2017), 1--10.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. F. Calisir and F. Calisir. 2004. The relation of interface usability characteristics, perceived usefulness, and perceived ease of use to end-user satisfaction with enterprise resource planning (ERP) systems. Computers in Human Behavior 20, 4 (2004), 505--515.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. T. Dinev and P. Hart. 2006. An extended privacy calculus model for e-commerce transactions. Information Systems Research 17, 1 (2006), 61--80. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. P. Dourish, R. Grinter, J. D. De La Flor, and M. Joseph. 2004. Security in the wild: User strategies for managing security as an everyday, practical problem. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing 8, 6 (2004), 391--401. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. T. Duebendorfer and S. Frei. 2009. Why silent updates boost security. Technical Report. TIK, ETH Zurich, No. 302.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. K. Edwards, E. Poole, and J. Stoll. 2008. Security automation considered harmful?. In Workshop on New Security Paradigms (NSPW). 33--42. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. M. Fagan, M. M. H. Khan, and R. Buck. 2015. A study of users' experiences and beliefs about software update messages. Computers in Human Behavior 51 (2015), 504--519. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. C. Flavián, M. Guinalíu, and R. Gurrea. 2006. The role played by perceived usability, satisfaction and consumer trust on website loyalty. Information & Management 43, 1 (2006), 1--14. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. M. Fleischmann, M. Amirpur, T. Grupp, A. Benlian, and T. Hess. 2016. The role of software updates in information systems continuance - An experimental study from a user perspective. Decision Support Systems 83 (2016), 83--96. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. K. Fu and J. Blum. 2014. Controlling for cybersecurity risks of medical device software. Biomedical Instrumentation and Technology 48 (2014), 38--41.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. C. Gkantsidis, T. Karagiannis, and M. Vojnovic. 2006. Planet scale software updates. ACM Computer Communication Review 36, 4 (2006), 423--434. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. B. G. Glaser, A. L. Strauss, and E. Strutzel. 1968. The discovery of grounded theory; strategies for qualitative research. Nursing research 17, 4 (1968), 364.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. J. Goodman, C. Cryder, and A. Cheema. 2013. Data collection in a flat world: The strengths and weaknesses of Mechanical Turk samples. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making 26, 3 (2013), 213--224.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  21. W. Gordon. 2015. What Windows 10's "Privacy Nightmare" settings actually do. Lifehacker (Aug 2015).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. G. Guest, A. Bunce, and L. Johnson. 2006. How many interviews are enough? An experiment with data saturation and variability. Field methods 18, 1 (2006), 59--82.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. H. Holden and R. Rada. 2011. Understanding the influence of perceived usability and technology self-efficacy on teachers' technology acceptance. Journal of Research on Technology in Education 43, 4 (2011), 343--367.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  24. U. Jawad. 2017. Microsoft: Windows 10 is the 'most secure' version of Windows, touts security enhancements. Neowin (Feb 2017).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. K. Jones, K. Tam, and M. Papadaki. 2016. Threats and impacts in maritime cyber security. Engineering & Technology Reference (2016), 1--12.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. G. Kelly. 2017. Microsoft warns Windows 7 is dangerous to use {Updated}. Forbes (Jan 2017).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. S. Kim and J.-Y. Son. 2009. Out of dedication or constraint? A dual model of post-adoption phenomena and its empirical test in the context of online services. MIS Quarterly 33, 1 (2009), 49--70. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. S. Kokolakis. 2017. Privacy attitudes and privacy behaviour: A review of current research on the privacy paradox phenomenon. Computers & Security 64 (2017), 122--134. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. S. Korff and R. Böhme. 2014. Too much choice: End-user privacy decisions in the context of choice proliferation. In Symposium on Usable Privacy and Security (SOUPS). 69--87. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. D. Kotz, K. Fu, C. Gunter, and A. Rubin. 2015. Security for mobile and cloud frontiers in healthcare. Commun. ACM 58, 8 (2015), 21--23. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. K. Lee. 2015. The Windows 10 privacy settings you need to change right now. TechRadar (Aug 2015).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. W. Mao. 2016. Sometimes "Fee" Is Better Than "Free": Token promotional pricing and consumer reactions to price promotion offering product upgrades. Journal of Retailing 92, 2 (2016), 173--184.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  33. W. Mason and S. Suri. 2012. Conducting behavioral research on Amazon's Mechanical Turk. Behavior Research Methods 44, 1 (2012), 1--23.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  34. A. Mathur and M. Chetty. 2017. Impact of user characteristics on attitudes towards automatic mobile application updates. In Symposium on Usable Privacy and Security (SOUPS). 175--193. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  35. Microsoft. 2016. Upgrade to Windows 10: FAQ. (2016).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. Microsoft. 2017. Windows lifecycle fact sheet. (Jul 2017).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. Microsoft. 2018. Extended Support Phase. (February 2018).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  38. G. Paolacci and J. Chandler. 2014. Inside the Turk: Understanding Mechanical Turk as a participant pool. Current Directions in Psychological Science 23, 3 (2014), 184--188.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  39. I. Paul. 2017. How to reclaim your privacy in Windows 10, piece by piece. PCWorld (Jul 2017).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  40. J. Quinn and T. Tran. 2010. Attractive phones don't have to work better: Independent effects of attractiveness, effectiveness, and efficiency on perceived usability. In Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI). 353--362. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  41. F. Y. Rashid. 2015. Why Windows 10 is the most secure Windows ever. (Sep 2015).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  42. A. Sasse, S. Brostoff, and D. Weirich. 2001. Transforming the 'weakest link' -- A human/computer interaction approach to usable and effective security. BT Technology Journal 19, 3 (2001), 122--131. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  43. S. Spiekermann, J. Grossklags, and B. Berendt. 2001. E-privacy in 2nd generation e-commerce: Privacy preferences versus actual behavior. In 3rd ACM Conference on Electronic Commerce (EC). 38--47. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  44. StatCounter Global Stats. 2017. Operating System Market Share Worldwide. (2017). http://gs.statcounter.com/os-market-shareGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  45. K. Sullivan. 1996. The Windows 95 user interface: A case study in usability engineering. In Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI). 473--480. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  46. J. Sunshine, S. Egelman, H. Almuhimedi, N. Atri, and L. Cranor. 2009. Crying wolf: An empirical study of SSL warning effectiveness. In USENIX Security Symposium. 399--416. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  47. G. Torkzadeh and W. Doll. 1999. The development of a tool for measuring the perceived impact of information technology on work. Omega 27, 3 (1999), 327--339.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  48. F.-M. Tseng and H.-Y. Lo. 2011. Antecedents of consumers' intentions to upgrade their mobile phones. Telecommunications Policy 35, 1 (2011), 74--86. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  49. K. Vaniea, E. Rader, and R. Wash. 2014. Betrayed by updates: How negative experiences affect future security. In Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI). 2671--2674. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  50. K. Vaniea and Y. Rashidi. 2016. Tales of software updates: The process of updating software. In Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI). 3215--3226. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  51. F. Vitale, J. McGrenere, A. Tabard, M. Beaudouin-Lafon, and W. Mackay. 2017. High costs and small benefits: A field study of how users experience operating system upgrades. In Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI). 4242--4253. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  52. R. Wash, E. Rader, K. Vaniea, and M. Rizor. 2014. Out of the loop: How automated software updates cause unintended security consequences. In Symposium on Usable Privacy and Security (SOUPS). 89--104. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  53. D. Wlodarz. 2013. Legacy apps holding you hostage? 7 ways to safely migrate off Windows XP. (Sep 2013).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  54. M. Wu, R. Miller, and S. Garfinkel. 2006. Do security toolbars actually prevent phishing attacks?. In Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI). 601--610. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Recommendations

Comments

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Sign in
  • Published in

    cover image ACM Other conferences
    ACSAC '18: Proceedings of the 34th Annual Computer Security Applications Conference
    December 2018
    766 pages
    ISBN:9781450365697
    DOI:10.1145/3274694

    Copyright © 2018 ACM

    Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    • Published: 3 December 2018

    Permissions

    Request permissions about this article.

    Request Permissions

    Check for updates

    Qualifiers

    • research-article
    • Research
    • Refereed limited

PDF Format

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader