Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

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

lists.zx2c4.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 392 posts

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

#271

Post by technofiend »

wlesieutre wrote: post #200
_ea1k wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> When they change that optional setting they introduced recently What setting was introduced recently? I remember such settings all the way back to the Nexus One. In fact, things were more closed back then as Android phones bought from AT&T had it hard coded to disable third party apps. I'm not aware of a US carrier doing that any more.

Might be talking about their "Advanced Protection Program": https://landing.google.com/advancedprotection/

It would be interesting to know if the APP protections "bleed" from APP profiles to the regular kind when they're both on a given device.

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

#272

Post by 0xCMP »

alias_neo wrote: post #7

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…

Also consider giving to Jason's Patreon[0]. He works on many open source projects including the original Git web interface and the `pass` tool.

[0]: https://www.patreon.com/zx2c4

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

#273

Post by tw04 »

VonGuard wrote: post #222
j1elo wrote: post #215

Apple doesn't deserve to have such careful and detail-oriented FOSS developers like Jason, developing for their platform. He is genuinely wasting time in order to work around Apple's developer-unfriendly platform. Not that I should be telling devs where they should spend their time... but I feel like so much effort is being devoted to fix Apple's issues. > When I'm debugging these issues, I'll often times spend a few…

Completely agree. Apple has nothing but contempt for its developers, and treats them like indentured servants. "Oh it took 10 years to get your app working right? Well, it doesn't work right anymore after yesterday's patch."

Also you're an open source and free project? If you want donations we're going to need a cut of that. Doesn't matter that you're providing our OS with functionality (for free) that we can't or won't create on our own.

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

#274

Post by rcoveson »

pimeys wrote: post #238
uncledave wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That could be said for any platform these days. It's certainly not specific to Apple!

I guess Windows doesn't break their compatibility almost ever. Linux doesn't break user-space, but of course the libraries you depend on might change in a few decades.

There are some old games I can't get to work on Windows 10 which worked fine on Windows XP. Amusingly, what usually ends up working best is wine.

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

#275

Post by jjcon »

lrvick wrote: post #256
j1elo wrote: post #215

Apple doesn't deserve to have such careful and detail-oriented FOSS developers like Jason, developing for their platform. He is genuinely wasting time in order to work around Apple's developer-unfriendly platform. Not that I should be telling devs where they should spend their time... but I feel like so much effort is being devoted to fix Apple's issues. > When I'm debugging these issues, I'll often times spend a few…

This is exactly why I won't use or develop for Apple products for any amount of money. I can't justify wasting that much time and stress on a platform that clearly is more concerned with meeting the needs of casual users and media professionals rather than developers or those concerned with freedom, security, or privacy.

> can't justify wasting that much time and stress on a platform that clearly is more concerned with meeting the needs of casual users and media professionals rather than developers

It’s because Apple prioritizes users over developers that they have so many users.

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

#276

Post by notriddle »

fxtentacle wrote: post #160
bombcar wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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”.

We're talking about an open source project. So if bigcorp wants OS X WireGuard support, they should be able to pay handsomely for it. If they aren't willing to pay, then I believe the project should just avoid offering it, to avoid getting burnt out from unreasonable requests.

> So if bigcorp wants OS X WireGuard support, they should be able to pay handsomely for it.

Who says they're not? A lot of the companies on https://www.wireguard.com/donations/ ship their own macOS software. Just because the Wireguard Mac app is free doesn't mean nobody's giving them money that's earmarked for Apple development.

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

#277

Post by biztos »

tomxor wrote: post #235
blacklight wrote: post #225

FOSS developers should simply stop developing good software for Apple devices. The absolute opacity of Apple's technical policies and their arrogant i-dont-care/its-your-problem approach against developers are quite renewed in the community. This ends up costing a lot of development time to developers who mostly work for free, who struggle to reverse engineer or debug what happens on MacOS/iOS, and (like Wireguard's…

> I know that in the past 15 years lots of tech-savvy people have opted for Apple products because "they're still UNIX under the hood, and unlike Linux they just work out of the box". But being Unix-like DOES NOT mean to be developer-friendly! Apple is still an opaque developer-unfriendly company even if it provides you with a native bash! That was true over 10 years ago (was certainly a big factor for me), but i'm n…

I’ve been developing for Linux using Macs for the last 12 years or so.

At first I was really into setting up everything just-so on the Mac, with an environment so closely mirroring the production servers that I was confident I could deploy stuff from there to staging.

But in the last few years, I ended up just having a reproducible set of dev and stage-like Docker containers. That way I can do all my coding in my nice shiny Apple UI, and all the build/test/run stuff happens in a place I have full control over.

This probably doesn’t solve everyone’s problems but for me it was the best way to have my Linux cake and eat my candy Apple too.

And yeah, the ZSH thing was super annoying.

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

#278

Post by pimeys »

jjcon wrote: post #275
lrvick wrote: post #256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is exactly why I won't use or develop for Apple products for any amount of money. I can't justify wasting that much time and stress on a platform that clearly is more concerned with meeting the needs of casual users and media professionals rather than developers or those concerned with freedom, security, or privacy.

> can't justify wasting that much time and stress on a platform that clearly is more concerned with meeting the needs of casual users and media professionals rather than developers It’s because Apple prioritizes users over developers that they have so many users.

This is kind of weird though, but aren't developers also users? Or are they just small enough fraction of the users?

Probably it just seems bigger here in Hacker News where most of Apple users are also developers...

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

#279

Post by tandr »

j1elo wrote: post #215

Apple doesn't deserve to have such careful and detail-oriented FOSS developers like Jason, developing for their platform. He is genuinely wasting time in order to work around Apple's developer-unfriendly platform. Not that I should be telling devs where they should spend their time... but I feel like so much effort is being devoted to fix Apple's issues. > When I'm debugging these issues, I'll often times spend a few…

> Apple should be losing devs in favor of other better platforms, not the other way around.

So far, good hardware, close-to-*ix-OS software, and penetration are kind of make them a hard competitor to beat.

What other "better" platforms are you thinking about?

Post reply on HN