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

381–390 of 392 posts

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

#381

Post by dcow »

nbzso wrote: post #37
dcow wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 tow…

As a long-time Apple user, I agree with developers on this. Give it time and they will abandon the platform, which is not geared to be anything more than a vertically integrated channel for money. "but if you’re not interested in spending it actually supporting macOS, don't market your project as a cross platform" This is again Apple driven effect. Most of the Open Source projects are cross-platform because of Mac Os…

I agree and I try to use Linux as much as possible, just to be clear. I want Apple to feel the effects of their lockdown on their platform. Right now just directing grief at macOS users who are trying to contribute to a project that claims support for macOS in their readme is not really fair. Give Apple the middle finger and drop support for their platform officially!

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

#382

Post by wayneftw »

saagarjha wrote: post #325
wayneftw wrote: post #321

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That would be an instance of very talented developers sinking even more of their time into Apple's despicable platform.

There's a lot of very undespicable people using the platform, unfortunately…

I would say not. Supporting a tyrant and a fascist by giving them your money is also despicable.

If you buy your stuff used that's fine IMO.

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

#383

Post by poutrathor »

Izikiel43 wrote: post #366
lalaithion wrote: post #309

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In my personal experience, git crashes about 1 in 3 commands I run on windows. Haskell takes ~10 times longer to compile on a ~4 year old desktop windows machine than a ~6 year old mac laptop. And I usually spend hours trying to get simple tools installed, vs. minutes on macs.

> git crashes about 1 in 3 commands I run on windows. I've been using git over 2 years on windows with no issues at all, it seems you have a buggy version?

Definitively a local issue between the chair and the computer.

The whole developers world would be up in arms if Git actually crashed in 1 out of 30 commands on Windows, _whatever the configuration, git bash, powershell, or WSL 1/2_. There would be yearly top hacker news post about "one year and still not fixed"

Heck, Git would not have reached its dominant position if it was such a buggy mess.

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

#384

Post by nbzso »

dcow wrote: post #381
nbzso wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a long-time Apple user, I agree with developers on this. Give it time and they will abandon the platform, which is not geared to be anything more than a vertically integrated channel for money. "but if you’re not interested in spending it actually supporting macOS, don't market your project as a cross platform" This is again Apple driven effect. Most of the Open Source projects are cross-platform because of Mac Os…

I agree and I try to use Linux as much as possible, just to be clear. I want Apple to feel the effects of their lockdown on their platform. Right now just directing grief at macOS users who are trying to contribute to a project that claims support for macOS in their readme is not really fair. Give Apple the middle finger and drop support for their platform officially!

What average or semi pro user (the core New Apple User) have not contemplated is that technologies on a macro scale at the current moment are a step towards the political agenda of control of governments and corporations over people.

This is not a conspiracy. This is the official plan for the 4th industrial revolution by WEF. (https://tinyurl.com/yyfmj7gk). The goal is to abolish private property and live in a real time data driven world which is clearly a Communistic Agenda "The theory of the communists may be summed up in the single sentence: Abolition of private property." - Karl Marx.

In this context big corporations are cooperating with governments under supervision of WEF to implement general control with global AI infrastructure (actually there is EU program for supercomputers network already in place). Apple, Google, Microsoft and Amazon are part of this network of influence and they will sell user data to governments on demand.

The idea of personal computing without authorisation(Digital ID https://tinyurl.com/y5he2qr9) and oversight (telemetry) will be contrary to the values of the new Digital Utopia. Obviously big tech is politically driven and will be protected from scrutiny in the future in this context.

Literature: "A Framework for Developing a National Artificial Intelligence Strategy" - WEF link - (https://tinyurl.com/y6lwfdcy).

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

#385

Post by vinay427 »

sneak wrote: post #327
pietrovismara wrote: post #316

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I can no longer invest the time to hack macOS sufficiently to permit me to ensure that no unauthorized traffic is leaving it. > This means none of my iPads or iPhones have SIMs in them any longer If you use Apple products for personal use: you sound like a masochist. If you are forced to use them professionally: I'm sorry for you.

Neither is true. Android in the stock configuration is much the same, and the hardware is worse.

The displays on iOS devices already ruin the experience for me nowadays. The perceivable smoothness from a 90-120Hz display still surprises me but now I can't really go back to an older display for daily use. Flagship Android devices also have far more hardware features in general (faster charging, more interfacing options, more cutting-edge "gimmicks," etc.). To be honest, I don't mind iOS, but I'm not really sure what iPhone hardware you think is better or even on par at a comparable price point.

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

#386

Post by tenacious_tuna »

searchableguy wrote: post #347
tenacious_tuna wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I actually have been trying this recently! I've been using VS Code via SSH into a WSL2 container running on my windows box and it's been going surprisingly well.... but that was after a moderate amount of effort to get WSL2 working to begin with, which was partially complicated by my past efforts of getting WSL1 to do similar behavior. I'm also not 100% confident NewCorp's IT would be kosher with me spooling that up.…

> that was after a moderate amount of effort to get WSL2 working to begin with, which was partially complicated by my past efforts of getting WSL1 to do similar behavior. Could you explain more? I know installing and switching to WSL2 isn't as straightforward on windows stable. Is that what you are referring to? If so, on insider - you can run wsl --install and it will work. If not running wsl2 by default, wsl --set-…

I had to fight with enabling/disabling Hyper-V in windows features for a while, and also somewhere I flashed the BIOS on my motherboard and it reset my virtualization-enable switch to "off" (which I guess was the default?)

50/50 PEBKAC and Windows being difficult, IMO, but my total unfamiliarity with troubleshooting windows made the process a bit more annoying than I felt it ought to be.

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

#387

Post by _ea1k »

wlesieutre wrote: post #354
_ea1k wrote: post #353

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I could be mistaken, but I'm not seeing a connection between that and third party app support.

> On your Android phone, only app installations from verified stores, like the Google Play Store and your device manufacturer’s app store, are allowed.

Oh, thanks, I somehow missed that line.

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

#388

Post by boznz »

segfaultbuserr wrote: post #31

> We faced rejections in submitting the app, because they decided to change their policy on the app having a link in the "About WireGuard" tool window to www.wireguard.com/donations/ (which they previously had allowed explicitly; now they want 30% or something) Last year Google started to ban donation links in FOSS apps, WireGuard was one of the first victims [0], completely removed from the store. I didn't know that…

Ive got a dumb phone and an awesome laptop, fuck the apple and google duopoly and their overpriced locked down ecosystems!

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

#389

Post by _djo_ »

enriquto wrote: post #100
toyg wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> when that button is clicked by, perhaps, only 10% of the users 10%? I think FOSS developers would be extremely happy if even 1% clicked on that kind of button. I reckon the actual stat is closer to 0.01%... This is absolute scroogerism from our mobile overlords. We badly need a really-open alternative to the Google/Apple world of feudal taxes.

> We badly need a really-open alternative F-Droid is a thing

If you opt into Google's Advanced Protection Program you can no longer install apps from F-Droid.

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

#390

Post by thw0rted »

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…

The reason is in the comment just below yours: Apple is a gatekeeper to ~40% of the US (last I checked, that number is low) and why bother writing an open-source tool if only half of your audience can use it? Especially if it's something like a VPN where infrastructure is involved -- you're certainly not going to set up one gateway for Apple users and another for everybody else.

We're stuck with this problem until the users have a bad enough experience that they move to a better platform.

Post reply on HN