4 ms·

This comment is like a canonical example of why a company would choose not to develop for Linux. 1Password puts real resources and risk into supporting a platfo

This comment is like a canonical example of why a company would choose not to develop for Linux. 1Password puts real resources and risk into supporting a platform that may not pay off, but it’s Not Good Enough for much of the community because: -The client is not open source -the backend is not open source -it’s not “a first class citizen” right away (the Windows port is by all accounts improving) I’m not trying to put down your comment but to point out that when you have a fragmented platform that is difficult to develop for plus a community that is often hostile to closed source or less than perfect feature parity you are going to be relatively deprived of commercial offerings. This is why we see less Linux support broadly. Not that you personally should change your opinions.

ubermonkey 6y ago
Well, maybe. I'm not a Linux desktop person, though, and I'm just as hacked off about 1P's shift to a hosted service, and their poor treatment of the Windows client.
iovrthoughtthis 6y ago
Do you not think that poor Linux support is a result of low users numbers rather than the communities requirements? MacOS has higher barriers to entry than Linux if you want to be on their stores, these do not seem to be an issue for people to overcome.
lghh 6y ago
I think it's fair to say users of different platforms have different needs and if a product doesn't fit that need they won't use it. I don't see any problem with that at all.
013a 6y ago
Developing for every platform has unique properties. Every platform has its own native UI toolkits and look-and-feel; try to release an Electron app, and people complain. Write a great iOS app, but no iPad port, or be a couple months late with support for The Notch, people complain. Linux's main difference is that, with so few users, when their priorities are disrespected by Big Corporate, the populace sides with Big Corporate. Rather ironic; most of the priorities Linux users have are motivated by respecting the user's privacy, security, and freedom. It seems likely to me that its a thought process similar to why much of the downtrodden American middle-class sides with Republicans, despite rarely having their best interests in mind. I use 1Password, and it's fine. But these complaints are legitimate. This is a closed-source security facing application from a company that has raised at-least $200,000,000, which at one time charged a large amount of up-front money ($60+) for their product, used dark patterns to drive customers to their subscription-based closed-source cloud product, then left the original users in the dust. AgileBits should have no-ones good will, and even as a 1Password user, I support anyone who uses this forum to discuss their move to alternatives.
- mapgrep 6y ago
  The Linux priorities I outlined are fundamentally different. It’s a demand that the maker of the software alter the core of their business model. This is very different from asking for a native UI or to use a core OS API, etc. Again, it’s fine to ask for a radical business change or require it but the frequency of this as a demand does help explain why few companies go down this path. (As for 1Password abandoning one time sales for subscriptions, to me this is a separate issue. One, it’s not news or part of the linked article, two it’s not particularly related to the Linux release, three it affects all platforms. However if you did try and relate it to this discussion I think their current business model is actually much more compatible with going open source than the old one. I don’t think they will do this but the bundling of storage with software that came with the subscription model offers a more economically viable path for open sourcing because their revenue is less dependent on being the software provider. You could argue it would actually help their sales by providing a fallback ecosystem that shows customer there is no lock in and by making it possible to audit the crypto used to ensure their infra is zero knowledge. I think even among Linux users only a small fraction want to run their own password servers. I know I don’t. But I think they would judge the risk of enabling a low rent low quality low cost turnkey competitor too high and frankly I would agree with them. I think an open core model could work where they keep the UI chrome closed but this will not satisfy the critics.) (Also I’m a longtime 1Password user myself. I was VERY bummed by the change to subscriptions but I don’t find it as dark as you do. The product I paid $60 or whatever for many years ago still works fine; old vaults continue to function so we were not really “left in the dust.” When I moved to a subscription it was because I needed new capabilities. Sharing passwords and other secrets with other people chief among them. This is IMO worth the subscription cost. My main concern is security; I do not like having to trust their closed source crypto to keep my stuff secure on their server. One party with sensitive data and crucial code is excessive risk. However I do not want to stand up my own server. That is even worse. And all the open source alternatives would require me to do this for sync support. Which is a bit odd considering 1pw used to offer peer to peer WiFi sync. I guess this is too hard for any of the open source projects to offer.)
  - bwoodruff 6y ago
    Thanks for the comments. The crypto is open source. We use the ring library: https://github.com/briansmith/ring https://github.com/briansmith/ring - Ben, 1Password
baumandm 6y ago
My takeaway of the grandparent comment is that 1Password squandered much of its customer goodwill, missed the opportunity to move into the Linux market, and their current attempts to build Linux support is too little too late. If this story came out in 2015, I think the response would be a lot more favorable. At this point Bitwarden checks all those boxes and costs nothing, so it's hard to compete.
- sjellis 6y ago
  Yeah, I would note that not only is the Bitwarden code Open Source (if you want to self host), the commercial service has a free account option, and the pay options are about $1 per month per person: https://bitwarden.com/pricing/ https://bitwarden.com/pricing/

ubermonkey 6y ago

Well, maybe. I'm not a Linux desktop person, though, and I'm just as hacked off about 1P's shift to a hosted service, and their poor treatment of the Windows client.

iovrthoughtthis 6y ago

Do you not think that poor Linux support is a result of low users numbers rather than the communities requirements? MacOS has higher barriers to entry than Linux if you want to be on their stores, these do not seem to be an issue for people to overcome.

lghh 6y ago

I think it's fair to say users of different platforms have different needs and if a product doesn't fit that need they won't use it. I don't see any problem with that at all.

013a 6y ago

Developing for every platform has unique properties. Every platform has its own native UI toolkits and look-and-feel; try to release an Electron app, and people complain. Write a great iOS app, but no iPad port, or be a couple months late with support for The Notch, people complain. Linux's main difference is that, with so few users, when their priorities are disrespected by Big Corporate, the populace sides with Big Corporate. Rather ironic; most of the priorities Linux users have are motivated by respecting the user's privacy, security, and freedom. It seems likely to me that its a thought process similar to why much of the downtrodden American middle-class sides with Republicans, despite rarely having their best interests in mind. I use 1Password, and it's fine. But these complaints are legitimate. This is a closed-source security facing application from a company that has raised at-least $200,000,000, which at one time charged a large amount of up-front money ($60+) for their product, used dark patterns to drive customers to their subscription-based closed-source cloud product, then left the original users in the dust. AgileBits should have no-ones good will, and even as a 1Password user, I support anyone who uses this forum to discuss their move to alternatives.

mapgrep 6y ago
The Linux priorities I outlined are fundamentally different. It’s a demand that the maker of the software alter the core of their business model. This is very different from asking for a native UI or to use a core OS API, etc. Again, it’s fine to ask for a radical business change or require it but the frequency of this as a demand does help explain why few companies go down this path. (As for 1Password abandoning one time sales for subscriptions, to me this is a separate issue. One, it’s not news or part of the linked article, two it’s not particularly related to the Linux release, three it affects all platforms. However if you did try and relate it to this discussion I think their current business model is actually much more compatible with going open source than the old one. I don’t think they will do this but the bundling of storage with software that came with the subscription model offers a more economically viable path for open sourcing because their revenue is less dependent on being the software provider. You could argue it would actually help their sales by providing a fallback ecosystem that shows customer there is no lock in and by making it possible to audit the crypto used to ensure their infra is zero knowledge. I think even among Linux users only a small fraction want to run their own password servers. I know I don’t. But I think they would judge the risk of enabling a low rent low quality low cost turnkey competitor too high and frankly I would agree with them. I think an open core model could work where they keep the UI chrome closed but this will not satisfy the critics.) (Also I’m a longtime 1Password user myself. I was VERY bummed by the change to subscriptions but I don’t find it as dark as you do. The product I paid $60 or whatever for many years ago still works fine; old vaults continue to function so we were not really “left in the dust.” When I moved to a subscription it was because I needed new capabilities. Sharing passwords and other secrets with other people chief among them. This is IMO worth the subscription cost. My main concern is security; I do not like having to trust their closed source crypto to keep my stuff secure on their server. One party with sensitive data and crucial code is excessive risk. However I do not want to stand up my own server. That is even worse. And all the open source alternatives would require me to do this for sync support. Which is a bit odd considering 1pw used to offer peer to peer WiFi sync. I guess this is too hard for any of the open source projects to offer.)
- bwoodruff 6y ago
  Thanks for the comments. The crypto is open source. We use the ring library: https://github.com/briansmith/ring https://github.com/briansmith/ring - Ben, 1Password

baumandm 6y ago

My takeaway of the grandparent comment is that 1Password squandered much of its customer goodwill, missed the opportunity to move into the Linux market, and their current attempts to build Linux support is too little too late. If this story came out in 2015, I think the response would be a lot more favorable. At this point Bitwarden checks all those boxes and costs nothing, so it's hard to compete.

sjellis 6y ago
Yeah, I would note that not only is the Bitwarden code Open Source (if you want to self host), the commercial service has a free account option, and the pay options are about $1 per month per person: https://bitwarden.com/pricing/ https://bitwarden.com/pricing/