I hope they migrate some of the design from mini to the normal version. The mini version looks good with better use of space.
Little Snitch Mini
201–210 of 276 posts
Re: Little Snitch Mini
#202For people who don't want to or can't pay the subscription fee, you can install Pi-Hole on a Docker container on your local machine and get almost the same functionality with the cost of a little more battery usage.
Re: Little Snitch Mini
#203Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why wouldn't he care? Keeping track of all the subscriptions "forced" upon you is a huge pain in the ass these days – and seemingly getting worse. Personally, I refuse to use subscription services out of principle. I much prefer to pay once and have it off my mind.
For only $400 per decade, I will handle your Little Snitch Mini subscription. Longer licensing agreements are also available. ;)
> per decade
So you're selling a more expensive subscription?
Re: Little Snitch Mini
#204Earlier quoted context omitted.
Blocking traffic is also the most important part of the scope of such firewall apps
What is your threat model, and what type of traffic are you hoping to block? I never claimed picosnitch to be a firewall. My use case involved running it on servers with a minimal OS where all applications are containerized. My goal was purely monitoring to see if any containers had rogue executables, and go from there. Without the containers, it would be trivial for a malicious program to stop or modify picosnitch,…
I never claimed you claimed it. I was just pointing out the huge deficiency that makes picosnitch not an alternative to the broader use case littlesnitch supports
To sidestep the more complicated discussion re. how poor the security architecture of Linux is, let's limit that use case to blocking legitimate apps' connections for privacy reasons
Re: Little Snitch Mini
#205Does this add up for someone using NextDNS/Pi-Hole?
Re: Little Snitch Mini
#206Any thoughts on using this (or software like it) to beef up the security of old MacOS versions? I have an old MacBook Pro that can’t run the latest macOS anymore. I would rather not toss the machine but I’m skittish to use it without security updates.
But I might be willing to use it if I could secure it “enough” by monitoring what it does on the Internet, and by not putting sensitive data on it - for example I wouldn’t log it in to my iCloud and would only use it for some non-sensitive tasks (I use TaskWarrior as a task tracker. This works fine on an old Thinkpad but that thing has a miserable screen.)
Re: Little Snitch Mini
#207"The full feature set, including connection blocking, extended traffic history time ranges, advanced display and filtering options and more is available as an in-app purchase." So this means as a company using MDM, I cannot purchase it for all my employees. MacOS devs who see IAP and subscriptions as the only purchase paths are leaving corporate purchases on the table. We choose software we can pay for. We are fine i…
The problem is: you can't do upgrade pricing in the app store. So your users would have to pay full price for a 2.0 upgrade. You could of course buy outside the app store - but you don't want that. And I don't want that, too (as a dev selling my software). Purchase orders are a PITA and I have been shafted by enterprise more than once. They get their licenses, I'm not getting my money because they just don't pay. Suc…
> The problem is: you can't do upgrade pricing in the app store.
That is not a real problem.
Many apps handle this by checking for a prior version and giving a discount (see Omni or Affinity approach), by having an upgrade window (e.g. 1Password approach before switching to subs outside app store), or by just charging full freight again (which nobody who values software actually minds, and enterprises that budget full retail software per person/year anyway definitely don't even think about).
If you charge $X a month over time and think that's fair, you can charge $X * 24 every two years, and let people who dislike the upgrade treadmill just sit on the old version till iOS APIs shift out from under them.
In the meantime, you had the two years cash up front which funds future development.
> They get their licenses, I'm not getting my money because they just don't pay. Sucks to be me.
What are you talking about? The Apple Business Manager UI is a web based app store, one searches for the app, clicks to pay full retail, and you get your full money, immediately, the same as you get your IAP or sub. Meanwhile, the app is bought in bulk, assigned to the employee base, and you just sold 15,000 copies at retail by having a full price version when you otherwise couldn't sell any.
You don't talk to the enterprise and more importantly, I don't have to talk to you, or any other indie dev with weird bespoke purchasing processes not already approved by the enterprise procurement and expense systems.
Re: Little Snitch Mini
#208Earlier quoted context omitted.
Please let’s stop comparing software subscriptions to coffee. It misses the point about the recurring cost and lock in, and not everyone lives in the USA and pays high prices for coffee every day (or ever). https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32738791
But if the developers live in the USA then they are paying high prices for coffee, and thus require a commensurate level of return on their work to survive.
I fall to see the connection. The product is directed to an international market. Besides, is coffee cup subscriptions common to merit the comparison?
Re: Little Snitch Mini
#209Earlier quoted context omitted.
Completely agree. Occasionally I run Charles Proxy[1] on my iPhone to analyze network activity and am disturbed by what I see. Software shouldn't be able to open arbitrary network connections without user consent/control, but we're not there yet to a large enough degree on mobile unfortunately. [1] https://www.charlesproxy.com/documentation/ios/
The reality is that this sort of control would only be attractive to a very very small fraction of users, and no, not just because ‘people don’t care about privacy’ or whatever. There are just very few situations where someone is going to be able to look at this sort of data and do anything meaningful with it, especially when a) most apps are justifiably internet-connected, and b) the homogeneity of public cloud infr…
Privacy is not the only use-case. Some users need to monitor data usage to avoid bills they cannot afford.
Re: Little Snitch Mini
#210Earlier quoted context omitted.
The problem is: you can't do upgrade pricing in the app store. So your users would have to pay full price for a 2.0 upgrade. You could of course buy outside the app store - but you don't want that. And I don't want that, too (as a dev selling my software). Purchase orders are a PITA and I have been shafted by enterprise more than once. They get their licenses, I'm not getting my money because they just don't pay. Suc…
> The problem is: you can't do upgrade pricing in the app store. That is not a real problem. Many apps handle this by checking for a prior version and giving a discount (see Omni or Affinity approach), by having an upgrade window (e.g. 1Password approach before switching to subs outside app store), or by just charging full freight again (which nobody who values software actually minds, and enterprises that budget ful…
> or by just charging full freight again
But is this possible with a one-time-full-price app in the App Store? It’s not, right? Once someone pays for your app, they get all updates forever. I think that’s what the person you were replying to was getting at.
Basically, there are 3 major purchase models for software:
1) I’m buying a forever license
2) I’m buying this major version only
3) I’m subscribing to this software on a monthly/yearly basis
The App Store only seems to support 1) and 3), but not 2). If you want to do 2), you have to roll it yourself outside of Apple’s infrastructure. Which means sending your own invoices, setting up your own key mechanisms, and all of that associated pain