Oh my goodness, the export settings… everything about this app… so minimalist, so beautiful… this should be in case studies for free/open usability.

Correction: the app itself doesn’t appear to be free/open (which is fine, it’s still an indie app and that definitely counts) although the interface library and some other components appear to be.

I also just wrote an email to the author to both praise him for making what is one of the most gorgeous apps I’ve seen in a long while and to ask what his plans are for the future.

I‘d love to see, for example, some EU funding being used to contribute this to the commons.

Ah, so the business model is that the app is sold on the Mac App Store and it’s free everywhere else. I’m totally cool with this.

Could still be open sourced under AGPL (like Better was) but I’m more than happy to see an indie developer making a living from an excellent app they’ve made.

@aral It's a bit more discriminatory. If you open the page with Safari, the only option is to buy the app. No editor. If you open the page with Chrome, it shows. That's kinda harsh, IMHO. Browser is browser. A website shouldn't reduce functionality just to sell the app. IMHO.

@aral Chrome v Safari on the same machine. Seeing how it supports even Opera, I can hardly imagine technical reasons for refusing to run the app on Safari.

@jwildeboer @aral
It doesn't work in Firefox either, so it seems to require the Chromium engine.
The app is available on Flathub and Snap Store for free, for $$ only on AppStore. Perhaps to cover the mandatory developer fees?


@sesivany @aral Ah, yes. Chrom{e, ium} engine required. That explains it.

Sign in to participate in the conversation

Mastodon instance for people with Wildeboer as their last name