The issue is not silent updates (an option to have unattended upgrades in some places are godsend!), but in not generally having an option to prevent those and not having a way to roll unwanted ones back.
========
An easy way would be to use telemetry to measure how many of your users change default settings. ;)
I only have this from 4 years ago [0]. But is also something I've observed.
> I think over the years I saw a lot of outcries when there were visible changes in various applications.
Visual changes are typically seen as unwarranted. It's a huge risk with minor gains (UX of new users) by alienating old users and hoping 'they'll adapt'. But to touch on this a bit...
Unhappy people are also the loudest. If a platform has 1,000,000 viewers and 1% change their settings and you screw with those settings - you're going to have 10,000 people who are pissed off and venting. Which can seem massive - and out of the 990,000 others maybe 2 or 3 might voice their approvals/thanks for the update?
This is why many game studios ignore their forums. Forums are typically only a minority of the overall fan base, even if they're typically the most outspoken/loyal fans.
[0] https://www.uie.com/brainsparks/2011/09/14/do-users-change-t...
I got a Windows 10 laptop recently and took a look around the OS. Relevant to the discussion, one thing was just brilliant - user satisfaction feedback buttons (the smiley/frowny faces in some apps). Hope such things help debiasing feedback.
For many apps that communicate with a remote service, you're gonna have to eat _some_ update somewhere down the line.
So, I'm not sure it is really great experience for most people. Given that generally there is no way to roll back, I suppose most just learned to live with such things, whenever it's great for them or not so much.
I may have a wrong idea, but I perceive it as a culture where user is nearly powerless against the almighty Developers' will. I still haven't gave up on my own preferences, yet. Fear that future will break me, though.