Live data from Hacker News

Response to “WireGuard: great protocol, but skip the Mac app”

lists.zx2c4.com

141–150 of 392 posts

Re: Response to “WireGuard: great protocol, but skip the Mac app”

#141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it legal? I thought you can run MacOS only on Mac hardware.

I don't see how such a thing might be illegal, but the current century never ceases to amaze me. In any case, it is just a (very popular) shell script that downloads a few publicly available files and runs them in a controlled environment. It does not harm anybody.

It's technologically doable, but running MacOS on non-Apple hardware is against the ToS.

Re: Response to “WireGuard: great protocol, but skip the Mac app”

#142
post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see how such a thing might be illegal, but the current century never ceases to amaze me. In any case, it is just a (very popular) shell script that downloads a few publicly available files and runs them in a controlled environment. It does not harm anybody.

It's technologically doable, but running MacOS on non-Apple hardware is against the ToS.

Is it? Anyhow, it does not mean that it is illegal, which was the original question. I guess most ToS are not enforceable in practice. The worst that may happen is that you "lose the warranty" of your macOS install and you cannot ask Apple for support. No big deal.

Re: Response to “WireGuard: great protocol, but skip the Mac app”

#143
post #111
post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IANAL - but I'm pretty sure the app platforms are breaking many laws here, not allowing people to freely donate. Like free speech, able to ask for help, freedom to do business, abuse of monopoly. They might be able to get away with a transaction fee, and a store fee, but they should not be able to censor text, links, etc. This is the new Mafia. If you don't play by their rules (theirs, not the law) your business dies…

Yes, you are obviously NAL. The rules are clear and are applied evenly; it is the even application of the rule that is causing the problem here. FOSS-advocates think they are special snowflakes who deserve an exception to the rule about asking for payment. The app stores (both Apple and Google) clearly disagree and think that this is something that will be easily gamed and abused. Nothing is preventing these apps fro…

I have certainly heard of apps removing all links to their website because Apple reviewers have followed a help/feedback link, gotten to their main website, and then found purchase/donation links there and rejected the review.

Re: Response to “WireGuard: great protocol, but skip the Mac app”

#144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For now. When they change that optional setting they introduced recently which blocks sideloading applications outside of the official store and make it non-optional, what are we going to do? Use special Chinese Android builds with Ali store (or whatever it's called)? Boiling the frog slowly and all.

Android is open source.

Only by the letter of the law, the android that ends up on your phone consists of mostly closed source binaries from Google that you don't get without installing the play store as well.

Re: Response to “WireGuard: great protocol, but skip the Mac app”

#145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For now. When they change that optional setting they introduced recently which blocks sideloading applications outside of the official store and make it non-optional, what are we going to do? Use special Chinese Android builds with Ali store (or whatever it's called)? Boiling the frog slowly and all.

Android is open source.

What is your point?

This kind of response completely ignores the fact that the vast majority of the drivers required to just run on modern hardware are closed source and that the vast majority of phones these days have their bootloaders locked.

Re: Response to “WireGuard: great protocol, but skip the Mac app”

#146
post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many apps (e.g. EteSync and WireGuard) are almost useless if they don't work for everyone within a certain group. A more extreme example is a messaging app. Will not having iOS support for a messaging app lose you 40% of your users? No, it will lose you 100%. In WireGuard's case it's maybe less obvious than messaging, but if WireGuard doesn't work on macOS, it's enough to have one Apple user in your whole organisatio…

What organization is it, that can't order an employee to use a different OS on a work computer?

When the employee is the CEO who wants to use his iPhone or an owner who wants to use her MacBook, the IT department bends.

And yes, the users are smart enough to see there’s an iOS client so you can’t just tell them “it’s not available”.

Re: Response to “WireGuard: great protocol, but skip the Mac app”

#147
In the developer documentation for Network extensions they describe how to enable them for Apps outside the App store:

https://developer.apple.com/documentation/bundleresources/en...

It's under "Discussion".

Haven't tried out if it works though, but the link in [6] that the developer refers to is 3 years old, so maybe check again?

Re: Response to “WireGuard: great protocol, but skip the Mac app”

#148

Couldn’t you just change the url to /about instead of /donations? Seems sort of the thing sketchy sites do to say one thing and link to another. If I want to donate to a project I want to browse the site and learn more about rather than straight to the donation page. Seems like a money grab to take me to the donation page.

To defend Apple here - if they allowed “donations” with only a 5% fee you’d have thousands of developers offing “free premium” to “donators”.

What Apple needs is a curated system to support open source development for apps - for example, after proving that you really are a non-profit (think Mozilla foundation) Apple could still charge the 30% but then rebate 20% back as a donation from Apple itself. Win/win.

Re: Response to “WireGuard: great protocol, but skip the Mac app”

#149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Felt like an enourmous waste of money and time. And it certainly was. But sometimes you have well-appreciated macOS users that you have not yet managed to convert out of it. In that case, instead of throwing away your money you can easily [0] install a Catalina vm inside linux or windows. With a quite small effort, you can readily check that your program compiles and runs on that shitty system. [0] https://github.c…

Is it legal? I thought you can run MacOS only on Mac hardware.

This is a TOS problem that I could personally not care less about. The bigger issue is that even though you're running in a VM, you're not going to get all the necessary hardware working for Mac OS. For me, I couldn't get my graphics drivers properly set up and as such couldn't get any OpenGL stuff to work as it would be on a real mac, so it was a no-go.

At least you can XCode working and do macOS builds.

Re: Response to “WireGuard: great protocol, but skip the Mac app”

#150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For now. When they change that optional setting they introduced recently which blocks sideloading applications outside of the official store and make it non-optional, what are we going to do? Use special Chinese Android builds with Ali store (or whatever it's called)? Boiling the frog slowly and all.

Android is open source.

The builds your phone comes with are not, and replacing them with your own assumes availability of things like unlocked bootloader.

And then, of course, applications like your banking won't work, because they require Google SafetyNet attestation for your security.

Post reply on HN