This looks cool enough, but it’s starting to drive me crazy how people are in such a rush to put out their macOS apps they can’t be bothered to get a developer account and run a one line command. It’s not hard.
I used to be sympathetic to complaints about not wanting to pay the developer account fee. But when you’re vibe coding, you’re probably paying a good chunk of change to your LLM supplier of choice every month, and the yearly developer account fee seems minor in comparison
Also, it’s just such a bad security precedent. This page describes the error you get as “the typical macOS Gatekeeper warning”, as though it were just another piece of corporate silliness, like clicking through a EULA.
If you don't want your name, address, phone number on public display you need to either set up a company or set up some forwarding. If you set up a company, you'll need to get a DUNS number. If you haven't done it before and don't know about the secret shortcut way to do that, it is very annoying to get one.
Anyway, I don't see a problem with getting it out the door. People can just choose not to install it if they don't like it. I mean that's the whole idea of being early anyway, isn't it? Don't like a crappy bodged together UI? Don't like a lack of support? Don't like an unsigned app? You can wait until it has those things according to your preferences. In the meantime, the creator gets real users and feedback ASAP.
Thank you for saying this! As stated on the website, this is a pre-release. Those who are not sure, absolutely do not have to install this and can wait for the official, notarized release. In the meantime, the app gets tested in the real world.
It's free so why not just publish it on github then so that people could read the code and compile it themselves.
Right now it's closed source binary with a big fat "DOWNLOAD FOR FREE" button and instructions casually telling you to disable the last barrier between your system and persistent malware. Nobody should recommend this to anybody
"don't know about the secret shortcut way to do that, it is very annoying to get one"
Is that a US thing? Because in the UK you just get one for free - Companies House sends the info over to them, and a couple of days later it is available to search
I just recently did all of this but the experience was not as bad as you are describing here. I got my DUNS number in 10 minutes. The only challenging part was using a Google Voice number for the account because there was an issue with the way I had created the business Apple account.
Gatekeeper and notarization are not silliness. They exist for a reason. I thought it would be a good idea to release the app during development when I am sure that it works correctly and then maybe get some feedback from early users.
The truth is that Gatekeeper should go the way of the devil.
It is my machine and I paid for it, why does the OS care about what I do with it? The only thing this leads to is making sure your customers grow into good little lemmings.
Perhaps the feeling is (at least sometimes, if not here) mutual. Some free software developers make apps for themselves and don't particularly want users (and least of all non-technical users that they'll be expected to support). They may not be interested in participating in Apple's system of obstructing software installation, especially if they just write their software for themselves.
I've never ended up with undesired software on my system except for under two circumstances: either (a) it's installed by the OS vendor, or (b) some proprietary indie software I used got bought by a shady company who now wants to spy on me and sell my data. Systems like Gatekeeper don't protect against either.
> Also, it’s just such a bad security precedent. This page describes the error you get as “the typical macOS Gatekeeper warning”, as though it were just another piece of corporate silliness, like clicking through a EULA.
It mostly is another piece of corporate silliness. For most people it rarely does something useful. But I agree; if you're courting normie users you should just pony up and get your code signed and notarized. Otherwise just tell people that if they don't already know what Gatekeeper is and understand the risks of bypassing it as well as how to do so, your software isn't for them.
The fewer apps make me depend on proprietary app stores the better. Just make it a homebrew cask and you're good to go. If I were to develop macOS apps (vibed or not, whatever) I wouldn't want to pay Apple either nor jump through KYC and review hoops.
Totally agree. There are significantly more new apps being released. I've been visiting the /r/macapps subreddit and they're having trouble filtering new submissions. I generally like the direction that they're taking https://www.reddit.com/r/macapps/comments/1ryaeex/rmacapps_m...
Even though it's more troublesome to submit apps to App Store, it's one signal that the app is not a malware.
Gatekeeper is a travesty and assault on user freedom. Apple should not be in charge of what you run on your computer, at all. Any exception to this should be opt in. If a user wants to insert a third party between themselves and a programmer they can elect to do that.
Let’s not forget when Apple’s certificate server was down and suddenly you couldn’t launch apps on macOS, to say nothing of the abuse of user rights.
they can’t be bothered to get a developer account and run a one line command
I applaud that they didn't kowtow to Apple's attempt to exercise control over their app and extort money from them. Why should we accede to policies that are designed to exploit us developers?
We developers add the real value to a platform. Don't believe me? Look up on how popular Sailfish OS or Windows Mobile OS is and why they failed or struggle. Apple should be grateful to this developer that they seek to add value to their platform instead of trying to figure out money grubbing ways on how to control and exploit them. (Of course, ultimately it is the users of the platform who are exploited - all charges by Apple are ultimately bore by them when they purchase an app through the App Store).
It's just sad that whether you are a user or a developer, Apple Fanbois would rather (ignorantly) place Apple's interest over their own consumer rights.
Except it is just another piece of corporate silliness.
Why don’t you purchase your own developer account and sign it yourself if you trust it? Or are you saying them paying Apple $100/yr in perpetuity is what will make you trust it?
I was skeptical that I’d find it useful since I can do all of these shell commands and such, but one feature I like is being able to effectively pare the feature set down to just what you need, making for a small but very useful menu.
Nice, but, and this is not personal, I would not trust this app with my computer internals. Probably also asks for sudo from time to time.. but I might ask Claude to make something similar for myself.. (sorry but just being honest)
I get that there's a market to put command line preferences in a GUI wrapper, but wasn't HN going to limit posts from new accounts? Oh, it's not in Show HN. They found a loophole.
Meanwhile, I'm running Claude Code and asking it to make me stupid bespoke things that only I want and I'm not spamming the internet with those tools because they aren't novel or useful for most people and you can have Claude Code build a version for the way that you work.
Go away, green accounts. Everyone is pretty tired of your presence.
The pricing debate is interesting. I'm running a similar service and found that giving away as much as possible for free helps build initial trust — getting people to actually try it once is the hardest part.
Pre-release feedback from the community is definitely valuable though.
I didn't know this part is the most diffcult.
117 comments
I used to be sympathetic to complaints about not wanting to pay the developer account fee. But when you’re vibe coding, you’re probably paying a good chunk of change to your LLM supplier of choice every month, and the yearly developer account fee seems minor in comparison
Also, it’s just such a bad security precedent. This page describes the error you get as “the typical macOS Gatekeeper warning”, as though it were just another piece of corporate silliness, like clicking through a EULA.
Anyway, I don't see a problem with getting it out the door. People can just choose not to install it if they don't like it. I mean that's the whole idea of being early anyway, isn't it? Don't like a crappy bodged together UI? Don't like a lack of support? Don't like an unsigned app? You can wait until it has those things according to your preferences. In the meantime, the creator gets real users and feedback ASAP.
Right now it's closed source binary with a big fat "DOWNLOAD FOR FREE" button and instructions casually telling you to disable the last barrier between your system and persistent malware. Nobody should recommend this to anybody
Is that a US thing? Because in the UK you just get one for free - Companies House sends the info over to them, and a couple of days later it is available to search
Where are these displayed?
>secret shortcut
I see vagueposting has found its way into HN.
It is my machine and I paid for it, why does the OS care about what I do with it? The only thing this leads to is making sure your customers grow into good little lemmings.
I've never ended up with undesired software on my system except for under two circumstances: either (a) it's installed by the OS vendor, or (b) some proprietary indie software I used got bought by a shady company who now wants to spy on me and sell my data. Systems like Gatekeeper don't protect against either.
> Also, it’s just such a bad security precedent. This page describes the error you get as “the typical macOS Gatekeeper warning”, as though it were just another piece of corporate silliness, like clicking through a EULA.
It mostly is another piece of corporate silliness. For most people it rarely does something useful. But I agree; if you're courting normie users you should just pony up and get your code signed and notarized. Otherwise just tell people that if they don't already know what Gatekeeper is and understand the risks of bypassing it as well as how to do so, your software isn't for them.
Even though it's more troublesome to submit apps to App Store, it's one signal that the app is not a malware.
Let’s not forget when Apple’s certificate server was down and suddenly you couldn’t launch apps on macOS, to say nothing of the abuse of user rights.
>
they can’t be bothered to get a developer account and run a one line commandI applaud that they didn't kowtow to Apple's attempt to exercise control over their app and extort money from them. Why should we accede to policies that are designed to exploit us developers?
We developers add the real value to a platform. Don't believe me? Look up on how popular Sailfish OS or Windows Mobile OS is and why they failed or struggle. Apple should be grateful to this developer that they seek to add value to their platform instead of trying to figure out money grubbing ways on how to control and exploit them. (Of course, ultimately it is the users of the platform who are exploited - all charges by Apple are ultimately bore by them when they purchase an app through the App Store).
It's just sad that whether you are a user or a developer, Apple Fanbois would rather (ignorantly) place Apple's interest over their own consumer rights.
> and the yearly developer account fee seems minor in comparison
Do you not realize that spending money on other useful services makes it harder, not easier, to waste on dev fees?
> as though it were just another piece of corporate silliness,
It IS another piece of corporate silliness. Though silliness is an extremely charitable word for what it really is
Cheering on the loss of autonomy and control over our own computers under the guise of 'silliness' is disgusting
Why don’t you purchase your own developer account and sign it yourself if you trust it? Or are you saying them paying Apple $100/yr in perpetuity is what will make you trust it?
An example is I have my airpods bound to ctrl+alt+b to connect via Bluetooth. This is to have it yank back control from my android phone.
https://sindresorhus.com/supercharge
I was skeptical that I’d find it useful since I can do all of these shell commands and such, but one feature I like is being able to effectively pare the feature set down to just what you need, making for a small but very useful menu.
Meanwhile, I'm running Claude Code and asking it to make me stupid bespoke things that only I want and I'm not spamming the internet with those tools because they aren't novel or useful for most people and you can have Claude Code build a version for the way that you work.
Go away, green accounts. Everyone is pretty tired of your presence.
Pre-release feedback from the community is definitely valuable though. I didn't know this part is the most diffcult.