Live data from Hacker News

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

lists.zx2c4.com

21–30 of 392 posts

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

#21
In case the author is reading this, I recently started using Wireguard in Mac OS with the Mac app and the experience has been great.

Not only is it much faster other VPNs that I used in the past, but compared to other clients (Forticlient and Tunnelblick), the overall experience feels much nicer, IMO.

Thank you so much for your work!

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

#22

This appears to be a very typical response from an Apple user who doesn't understand the lengths and hoops developers have to jump through to work around Apple's many, many restrictions, bugs and limitations. In my day job, our Apple developers have spent years finding solutions to iOS restrictions around CallKit, Push Notifications and NSTodaysProblem, and those are just the things Apple has intentionally restricted…

I love Jason’s response and think it carries the right tone and is delivered near flawlessly. It’s clearly frustrating to deal with Apple’s platform lockdown, and he captures such in a professional and rational manner. Bravo.

What bothers me is that I’ve experienced an increasing number of maintainers of supposed cross platform projects simply not care about macOS anymore to the extent that they’re openly hostile towards macOS users. I know what you do is free and I have no entitlement to anything from you, but don't antagonize me when I add suggestions to open discussion and feature requests to your issue tracker to try and help participate in improving the way your project works on macOS. I’m probably willing to do some work but also need to get the lay of the land first.

I would challenge those maintainers to be honest. Yes, it’s your time, but if you’re not interested in spending it actually supporting macOS, don't market your project as a cross platform. Like it or not the macOS platform is changing and if you’re not along for the ride don’t grief everyone who is (either by choice or by requirement).

Just to be crystal clear: Json does not fall in this bucket, but this topic in general seems all too familiar lately.

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

#24

This appears to be a very typical response from an Apple user who doesn't understand the lengths and hoops developers have to jump through to work around Apple's many, many restrictions, bugs and limitations. In my day job, our Apple developers have spent years finding solutions to iOS restrictions around CallKit, Push Notifications and NSTodaysProblem, and those are just the things Apple has intentionally restricted…

> I encourage others to "put their money where their mouth is" and show a little support for the people making and sharing this software for free

Just went to donate for myself, and happened to spot Rachel’s name in the list of donors too, so that’s a nice little end to the story :)

(Not as nice as “apple either fixes their APIs or permits people to work around them”, but still...)

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

#25

This appears to be a very typical response from an Apple user who doesn't understand the lengths and hoops developers have to jump through to work around Apple's many, many restrictions, bugs and limitations. In my day job, our Apple developers have spent years finding solutions to iOS restrictions around CallKit, Push Notifications and NSTodaysProblem, and those are just the things Apple has intentionally restricted…

>If our users knew the half of what our Apple Developers have to do, the meetings, discussions, concessions and re-design that has to be done to make things just work, even on par with the Android equivalent, they might be a little bit more understanding.

It's frustrating, but it's also great job security.

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

#26

I don't get it. You cannot write a VPN app for MacOs and let people just download the executable from your website? Pretty sure I've never opened the app store on my laptop and still have a VPN installed.

that's using older and deprecated frameworks including possibly kernel extensions, all of which are going to go away in the future.

Wireguard is using the newer and non-deprecated NetworkExtension framework which requires an entitlement that's only given to app-store apps.

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

#28
post #20

Can you not release it as a .dmg, without going through the Apple Store? Love WireGuard btw

> That sort of suggests another question, though: why are we in the App Store at all? Because as far as I know, Apple only allows NetworkExtension-based apps to be distributed via the App Store, according to their developer relations guy [6], so we're locked in. And even if they were to change that someday somehow, and we went to standalone distribution, we would then have to support two parallel distribution channels so as not to abandon former Mac App Store users, presumably, which means we'd still be limited by App Store restrictions.

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

#29
post #21

In case the author is reading this, I recently started using Wireguard in Mac OS with the Mac app and the experience has been great. Not only is it much faster other VPNs that I used in the past, but compared to other clients (Forticlient and Tunnelblick), the overall experience feels much nicer, IMO. Thank you so much for your work!

Absolutely agree. The app just worked. The connection is fast and stable.

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

#30
I for one think the Mac app is awesome. I much, much, much, SO much prefer telling people to install from the App Store as opposed to, well, anything else. Especially I would never, ever tell anyone to use Macports. It's just not the way forward.

Do not skip the Mac app. It's pretty good.

Post reply on HN