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

Post by matkoniecz » Wed, Jan 13, 2021, 11:35 AM UTC

DaiPlusPlus wrote: post #35

w0utert wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Reading through the explanation IMO the problem is not that Apple wants to force VPN apps to use frameworks and a distribution model they feel best fits their security/safety model. There are good arguments to be made for that. The problem is that the framework itself is just shitty and Apple should improve it. This is one of the things I dislike most about Apple: even despite the high price I pay for their products…

> especially since they have basically been printing money for over ~10 years now and have no excuses to not improve these kinds of things. Apple can't hire enough devs. I told an SWE friend of mine at Apple that I wouldn't mind working there - then he explained to me how restrictive it is to work at Apple (e.g. you have to close your GitHub account, you can't do any moonlighting or FOSS contributions: even on your o…

Post by viraptor » Wed, Jan 13, 2021, 11:40 AM UTC

DaiPlusPlus wrote: post #36

pilif wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Apple can't possibly get rid of kernel extensions - that's the only way to really extend a system in new and innovative ways (user-mode drivers are more like glorified serial-port applications). So much of Apple's platform today is made up of features that were only possible by extending the OS (e.g. Multi-Finder). Apple's going to have trouble if they keep on hindering the people that made their platform and support…

Post by codefined » Wed, Jan 13, 2021, 11:46 AM UTC

apple-sauce wrote: post #16

Honestly, I don't get it. Apple makes big money from their ecosystem. Wireguard developer provides high-quality solution for free, helping to grow proprietary ecosystem, essentially helping Apple to make more money indirectly and directly (by giving 30% from donations). In return developer gets tons of hate from users and from Apple itself in the form of delayed reviews, rejects and constant threat of violating some…

Post by [deleted] » Wed, Jan 13, 2021, 11:49 AM UTC

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…

Post by fxtentacle » Wed, Jan 13, 2021, 11:51 AM UTC

tasn wrote: post #46

apple-sauce wrote: post #16

Honestly, I don't get it. Apple makes big money from their ecosystem. Wireguard developer provides high-quality solution for free, helping to grow proprietary ecosystem, essentially helping Apple to make more money indirectly and directly (by giving 30% from donations). In return developer gets tons of hate from users and from Apple itself in the form of delayed reviews, rejects and constant threat of violating some…

Users demand it. You can't have a popular VPN app without Apple support (because at least one person in the org will have an iDevice), so you have to do it. I made another comment in this thread about my experience building EteSync. That's one of the more annoying parts about Apple being the gatekeeper to 40% of the US population (and in effect, to 100% of businesses). As a developer, you are just stuck with no way o…