6 ms·

Show HN: Brewer X, a native macOS client for Homebrew

40 points by tommasongr 2y ago

Hi HN! Like many of you, for my entire career I have relied on Homebrew to install all kinds of software on my Mac. That's why today I'm really excited to share a new app that my partner and I are building: Brewer X, a refreshing user interface for Homebrew. Brewer X is graphical interface that lives on top of Homebrew. Leveraging the power of native APIs improves the classic experience and unlocks new features. For example: • bulk actions are performed in parallel • syncing the entire library locally provides incredible search performances and the ability to query descriptions and other previously unaccessible fields • maintenance scripts run automatically for you • last but not least... app icons (or favicons when not available) let you quickly identify what you're looking for The app is written in Swift and uses only AppKit with Nib files for top performance, pixel perfect design, and maximum flexibility. We also designed the app icon and all the others in the UI ourselves. Following the great insights from Sketch[^1] we managed to make them super crispy. We're also very proud to have been featured in the macOS App Icon Book[^2]. The app has only been out for a couple of weeks, but we've already seen an amazing response from the community. We can't tell you all of our future plans yet, but here's a list of things we'd like to see in the app in the near future: • Import/Export • Automatic replacement of apps installed without Homebrew • Notifications about available updates • Finder actions • Spotlight integration I hope you find Brewer X interesting. We're happy to answer any question! [^1]: https://www.sketch.com/blog/how-we-redesigned-our-toolbar-icons-for-big-sur-and-monterey/ https://www.sketch.com/blog/how-we-redesigned-our-toolbar-ic... [^2]: https://www.appiconbook.com/ https://www.appiconbook.com/

tardoe 2y ago
I clicked on this really fast because this would be nice... but I really have to complain about the pricing model. $49 "once" is a scam when it only comes with 1 year of updates but an extra year of updates for $29 (60% more!!). Exactly how many features can one add to a Home-brew UI in the space of 2 years? There's no detail on what's in the roadmap to warrant such a price (on the website) nor is there the option of a trial. I shouldn't have to email for a refund (as advertised) if I feel like $50 was a rip-off. Honestly, if this was $10-20, I would already have paid.
- pharos92 2y ago
  Agreed, the plethora of overpriced non-essential apps with shit pricing models that cream "one-off" and "as-a-service/updates" models really irk me. I just flatly refuse now.
  - 95014_refugee 2y ago
    Try making a living as an indie developer and then bitch about pricing. As others have noted, the up-front honesty and realistic pricing are a lot more refreshing and encouraging than some race-to-the-bottom pricing that guarantees the dev is not paying attention or is going to be forced to find other ways to feed their family. If you aren’t prepared to compensate someone for the value they’ve created that’s fair, but claiming it’s somehow their fault is not being honest.
    - tommasongr 2y ago
      Thanks ;) This is the first place where we received such negative feedback. Even if we're a bit surprised, I think some of them might be quite useful and interesting. However, some of them are just not even worth responding, to use kind words ahah
- 999900000999 2y ago
  It really feels like a solution in want of a problem. I'm already in the terminal!
  - tommasongr 2y ago
    I'm sorry if the website didn't convey the right idea, but we know that this is not, at least right now, a "painkiller". This is just something nice to use. Not targeted to somebody with the wet dream of macOS being a tiling window manager... We're developers ourself, we love the terminal, and we recognise its strengths. If you're already satisfied with that you absolutely don't have to purchase Brewer X. Friends as before ;)
- tailspin2019 2y ago
culopatin 2y ago
Isn’t there already a client for homebrew on macOS that you trigger by the command brew?
- akaike 2y ago
  That's exactly what brew does. Just execute it and it updates everything automatically ... for free.
tailspin2019 2y ago
Pricing comments aside, this looks very nicely designed and executed.
- tommasongr 2y ago
  Thank you so much!
licebmi__at__ 2y ago
All the best, but… yeah I don’t see myself and in fact anybody paying for this, even less a “subscription” amount. We are not talking about git or some command with hundreds os options and combinations, but brew, which is so simple that any abstraction on top seems to me like overkill.
- tommasongr 2y ago
  Thank you. As I said in another comment, we know this is not a "painkiller" app, at least right now. We just wanted to create something nice to use. Everyone who's already happy with using brew in the terminal should not even try Brewer X. The app is for people who sometime prefers to have a good UI in front of them. Of course, our hope for the future is to add enough new and cool features that brew could never offer that the app might be interesting also for everyone else. Till then keep using the terminal ;)
jasonjmcghee 2y ago
I don't doubt there's a crowd that would pay for this tool, but not sure HN is the right target audience. Maybe /r/macapps? I feel like people here likely aren't willing to pay for UIs on top of ffmpeg, brew, git, etc. Especially with open source versions: https://github.com/buresdv/Cork https://github.com/buresdv/Cork https://github.com/brunophilipe/Cakebrew https://github.com/brunophilipe/Cakebrew Just my take- could be totally wrong / have a poor perception of who uses HN these days.
- cchance 2y ago
  THIS! 49$ for a frontend UI for an app thats mostly used with 1 off install/upgrade commands?
- hn_acker 2y ago
  Note: Cork is not open source. Cork is source-available and under the Commons Clause. As of commit 404943c, the README.md [1] of Cork mistakenly calls Cork "open-source": > Cork is licensed under Commons Clause. > This means that Cork open-source even though the very FAQ for the Commons Clause asserts otherwise [2]: > Is this “Open Source”? > “Open source”, has a specific definition that was written years ago and is stewarded by the Open Source Initiative, which approves Open Source licenses. Applying the Commons Clause to an open source project will mean the source code is available, and meets many of the elements of the Open Source Definition, such as free access to source code, freedom to modify, and freedom to re-distribute, but not all of them. So to avoid confusion, it is best not to call Commons Clause software “open source.” The Commons Clause bans selling of the software and is written in a way that allows the copyright holder to add more restrictions [2]. Cork does add more restrictions [1]: > This means that Cork open-source and you can do whatever you want with Cork's source, like modifying it, contributing to it etc., but you can't sell or distribute Cork or modified versions of it. > Moreover, you can’t distribute compiled versions of Cork without consulting me first. Compiling versions for your personal use is fine. [1] https://github.com/buresdv/Cork https://github.com/buresdv/Cork [2] https://commonsclause.com/ https://commonsclause.com/
- tommasongr 2y ago
  You might be right... Honestly this is the first place where we received such comments. Definitely our mistake. Although, I think it's worth pointing out that Cakebrew hasn't been actively maintained in 3 years and has never supported Casks. Cork on the other hand is actively developed and supports Casks, but we think the interface and user experience are not the best. For what we've seen so far Brewer X mostly appeals someone who can't get along with poorly designed UIs just to use a free tool.
manuelmoreale 2y ago
Free alternative available here: https://www.cakebrew.com/ https://www.cakebrew.com/ Repo link: https://github.com/brunophilipe/Cakebrew https://github.com/brunophilipe/Cakebrew
- BooleanMaestro 2y ago
  LGTM.
  - brailsafe 2y ago
    I don't know what LGTM means
    - Alifatisk 2y ago
      “Looks good to me”
latexr 2y ago
> pixel perfect design This phrase has lost all meaning. We can see from your screenshots that the table titles are misaligned from the items, as is the “Search” text. Don’t call something “pixel perfect” unless you really went in there and manually nudged every element pixel by pixel.
tailspin2019 2y ago
OP, please do not be discouraged by the pessimism in some of these comments. I don't think they are representative of your target audience for this app. Those who know how much had work it takes to build and launch a product like this - especially such a nice looking one, appreciate your work!
- tommasongr 2y ago
  Thank you so much ;) We clearly didn't expect some of these reactions but we probably didn't know the audience of this website very well... Our bad. Thanks for the "nice looking" :)
yungporko 2y ago
it does look very nice, but as a long time mac user who does often pay for conveniences like these... $49 once is already far too much for the value it provides and there's no way in hell that i'd be willing to pay the annual subscription for updates. if this was a one off $20-$25, i would buy it.
- tommasongr 2y ago
  Hi there! Thanks for your opinion. We get that for some people the current price tag is too high. Honestly we think that going forward with everything we planned to add will be justified. However, we admit that maybe is hard to ask people to pay upfront for some benefit they will get in the future. You don't have to pay an annual subscription for updates. If you decide to not do that you can continue using the app. Was it clear in the copy or not? Maybe we can make it even clearer. Thanks
  - rrr_oh_man 2y ago
    I think the issue might be that in this model it’s not guaranteed that I’ll be able to run this on my system in x years.
    - tommasongr 2y ago
      Okk I get it but a lot of other apps do the same… consider that from our perspective the alternative would be to run a standard subscription. Is that preferable? Personally I would say no, but maybe it’s just me.
      - yungporko 2y ago
        honestly the main issue is just that the value provided by a gui for a package manager i can already make use of isn't worth $49 to me (and many others i'd wager), and it certainly isn't worth paying multiple times for. i'm sure the features you have planned are cool but it's still just a front end for homebrew whichever way you look at it. i don't mean to diminish your work at all - it really does look great and i mean that, and hopefully you'll prove me wrong, but i don't think you've properly considered what value this actually provides to the people you want to buy it. you might say that $49 + an annual subscription (and it is a subscription by the way, you can call it what you like but that's objectively what it is) is what you need to charge in order to make the time/effort you spent on development worth it for you, which is fair, but consider it from the POV of a potential customer: it's $49 + an annual subscription for a prettier way to achieve something that they probably use quite rarely, something they can already do, and something which there are already free alternatives to. consider something like bettermouse (https://better-mouse.com https://better-mouse.com). macOS is borderline unusable without it, i'd sell my computer and switch to linux that same week if bettermouse disappeared. i make use of it for 100% of the time i use my computer, and it costs $7.99 one time, forever. the developer could double or even triple the price, and it still wouldn't even be half of what you're asking for.
rrr_oh_man 2y ago
I really hate those "How dare you charge money for software" comments, when we’re talking about something that looks neat, comes from friendly people who respond to comments, and costs around two cocktails in Miami
- tommasongr 2y ago
  Thanks for the comment. Means a lot to see someone who recognises that. We know that not everybody has the some financial conditions but we didn't expect such harsh reactions for the price. I agree that maybe we could improve some of the wording we're using, but the price itself seems pretty reasonable to me. Personally I have multiple pieces of software which I pay 50 bucks a month or more to use. $49 for the first year and optionally $29 after that didn't seem a problem for us...
syncbehind 2y ago
I'm clearly not in the demographic for this. However, I'm immediately dubious about any "maintenance scripts claims". That sounds very opaque. Does your app have any rollback / contingencies in place in case your maintenance scripts break something? • Automatic replacement of apps installed without Homebrew Does that mean your app would look in the homebrew repo to find similar apps and links it?

40 points by tommasongr 2y ago

tardoe 2y ago

I clicked on this really fast because this would be nice... but I really have to complain about the pricing model. $49 "once" is a scam when it only comes with 1 year of updates but an extra year of updates for $29 (60% more!!). Exactly how many features can one add to a Home-brew UI in the space of 2 years? There's no detail on what's in the roadmap to warrant such a price (on the website) nor is there the option of a trial. I shouldn't have to email for a refund (as advertised) if I feel like $50 was a rip-off. Honestly, if this was $10-20, I would already have paid.

pharos92 2y ago
Agreed, the plethora of overpriced non-essential apps with shit pricing models that cream "one-off" and "as-a-service/updates" models really irk me. I just flatly refuse now.
- 95014_refugee 2y ago
  Try making a living as an indie developer and then bitch about pricing. As others have noted, the up-front honesty and realistic pricing are a lot more refreshing and encouraging than some race-to-the-bottom pricing that guarantees the dev is not paying attention or is going to be forced to find other ways to feed their family. If you aren’t prepared to compensate someone for the value they’ve created that’s fair, but claiming it’s somehow their fault is not being honest.
  - tommasongr 2y ago
    Thanks ;) This is the first place where we received such negative feedback. Even if we're a bit surprised, I think some of them might be quite useful and interesting. However, some of them are just not even worth responding, to use kind words ahah
999900000999 2y ago
It really feels like a solution in want of a problem. I'm already in the terminal!
- tommasongr 2y ago
  I'm sorry if the website didn't convey the right idea, but we know that this is not, at least right now, a "painkiller". This is just something nice to use. Not targeted to somebody with the wet dream of macOS being a tiling window manager... We're developers ourself, we love the terminal, and we recognise its strengths. If you're already satisfied with that you absolutely don't have to purchase Brewer X. Friends as before ;)
tailspin2019 2y ago

culopatin 2y ago

Isn’t there already a client for homebrew on macOS that you trigger by the command brew?

akaike 2y ago
That's exactly what brew does. Just execute it and it updates everything automatically ... for free.

tailspin2019 2y ago

Pricing comments aside, this looks very nicely designed and executed.

tommasongr 2y ago
Thank you so much!

licebmi__at__ 2y ago

All the best, but… yeah I don’t see myself and in fact anybody paying for this, even less a “subscription” amount. We are not talking about git or some command with hundreds os options and combinations, but brew, which is so simple that any abstraction on top seems to me like overkill.

tommasongr 2y ago
Thank you. As I said in another comment, we know this is not a "painkiller" app, at least right now. We just wanted to create something nice to use. Everyone who's already happy with using brew in the terminal should not even try Brewer X. The app is for people who sometime prefers to have a good UI in front of them. Of course, our hope for the future is to add enough new and cool features that brew could never offer that the app might be interesting also for everyone else. Till then keep using the terminal ;)

jasonjmcghee 2y ago

I don't doubt there's a crowd that would pay for this tool, but not sure HN is the right target audience. Maybe /r/macapps? I feel like people here likely aren't willing to pay for UIs on top of ffmpeg, brew, git, etc. Especially with open source versions: https://github.com/buresdv/Cork https://github.com/buresdv/Cork https://github.com/brunophilipe/Cakebrew https://github.com/brunophilipe/Cakebrew Just my take- could be totally wrong / have a poor perception of who uses HN these days.

cchance 2y ago
THIS! 49$ for a frontend UI for an app thats mostly used with 1 off install/upgrade commands?
hn_acker 2y ago
Note: Cork is not open source. Cork is source-available and under the Commons Clause. As of commit 404943c, the README.md [1] of Cork mistakenly calls Cork "open-source": > Cork is licensed under Commons Clause. > This means that Cork open-source even though the very FAQ for the Commons Clause asserts otherwise [2]: > Is this “Open Source”? > “Open source”, has a specific definition that was written years ago and is stewarded by the Open Source Initiative, which approves Open Source licenses. Applying the Commons Clause to an open source project will mean the source code is available, and meets many of the elements of the Open Source Definition, such as free access to source code, freedom to modify, and freedom to re-distribute, but not all of them. So to avoid confusion, it is best not to call Commons Clause software “open source.” The Commons Clause bans selling of the software and is written in a way that allows the copyright holder to add more restrictions [2]. Cork does add more restrictions [1]: > This means that Cork open-source and you can do whatever you want with Cork's source, like modifying it, contributing to it etc., but you can't sell or distribute Cork or modified versions of it. > Moreover, you can’t distribute compiled versions of Cork without consulting me first. Compiling versions for your personal use is fine. [1] https://github.com/buresdv/Cork https://github.com/buresdv/Cork [2] https://commonsclause.com/ https://commonsclause.com/
tommasongr 2y ago
You might be right... Honestly this is the first place where we received such comments. Definitely our mistake. Although, I think it's worth pointing out that Cakebrew hasn't been actively maintained in 3 years and has never supported Casks. Cork on the other hand is actively developed and supports Casks, but we think the interface and user experience are not the best. For what we've seen so far Brewer X mostly appeals someone who can't get along with poorly designed UIs just to use a free tool.

manuelmoreale 2y ago

Free alternative available here: https://www.cakebrew.com/ https://www.cakebrew.com/ Repo link: https://github.com/brunophilipe/Cakebrew https://github.com/brunophilipe/Cakebrew

BooleanMaestro 2y ago
LGTM.
- brailsafe 2y ago
  I don't know what LGTM means
  - Alifatisk 2y ago
    “Looks good to me”

latexr 2y ago

> pixel perfect design This phrase has lost all meaning. We can see from your screenshots that the table titles are misaligned from the items, as is the “Search” text. Don’t call something “pixel perfect” unless you really went in there and manually nudged every element pixel by pixel.

tailspin2019 2y ago

OP, please do not be discouraged by the pessimism in some of these comments. I don't think they are representative of your target audience for this app. Those who know how much had work it takes to build and launch a product like this - especially such a nice looking one, appreciate your work!

tommasongr 2y ago
Thank you so much ;) We clearly didn't expect some of these reactions but we probably didn't know the audience of this website very well... Our bad. Thanks for the "nice looking" :)

yungporko 2y ago

it does look very nice, but as a long time mac user who does often pay for conveniences like these... $49 once is already far too much for the value it provides and there's no way in hell that i'd be willing to pay the annual subscription for updates. if this was a one off $20-$25, i would buy it.

tommasongr 2y ago
Hi there! Thanks for your opinion. We get that for some people the current price tag is too high. Honestly we think that going forward with everything we planned to add will be justified. However, we admit that maybe is hard to ask people to pay upfront for some benefit they will get in the future. You don't have to pay an annual subscription for updates. If you decide to not do that you can continue using the app. Was it clear in the copy or not? Maybe we can make it even clearer. Thanks
- rrr_oh_man 2y ago
  I think the issue might be that in this model it’s not guaranteed that I’ll be able to run this on my system in x years.
  - tommasongr 2y ago
    Okk I get it but a lot of other apps do the same… consider that from our perspective the alternative would be to run a standard subscription. Is that preferable? Personally I would say no, but maybe it’s just me.
    - yungporko 2y ago
      honestly the main issue is just that the value provided by a gui for a package manager i can already make use of isn't worth $49 to me (and many others i'd wager), and it certainly isn't worth paying multiple times for. i'm sure the features you have planned are cool but it's still just a front end for homebrew whichever way you look at it. i don't mean to diminish your work at all - it really does look great and i mean that, and hopefully you'll prove me wrong, but i don't think you've properly considered what value this actually provides to the people you want to buy it. you might say that $49 + an annual subscription (and it is a subscription by the way, you can call it what you like but that's objectively what it is) is what you need to charge in order to make the time/effort you spent on development worth it for you, which is fair, but consider it from the POV of a potential customer: it's $49 + an annual subscription for a prettier way to achieve something that they probably use quite rarely, something they can already do, and something which there are already free alternatives to. consider something like bettermouse (https://better-mouse.com https://better-mouse.com). macOS is borderline unusable without it, i'd sell my computer and switch to linux that same week if bettermouse disappeared. i make use of it for 100% of the time i use my computer, and it costs $7.99 one time, forever. the developer could double or even triple the price, and it still wouldn't even be half of what you're asking for.

rrr_oh_man 2y ago

I really hate those "How dare you charge money for software" comments, when we’re talking about something that looks neat, comes from friendly people who respond to comments, and costs around two cocktails in Miami

tommasongr 2y ago
Thanks for the comment. Means a lot to see someone who recognises that. We know that not everybody has the some financial conditions but we didn't expect such harsh reactions for the price. I agree that maybe we could improve some of the wording we're using, but the price itself seems pretty reasonable to me. Personally I have multiple pieces of software which I pay 50 bucks a month or more to use. $49 for the first year and optionally $29 after that didn't seem a problem for us...

syncbehind 2y ago

I'm clearly not in the demographic for this. However, I'm immediately dubious about any "maintenance scripts claims". That sounds very opaque. Does your app have any rollback / contingencies in place in case your maintenance scripts break something? • Automatic replacement of apps installed without Homebrew Does that mean your app would look in the homebrew repo to find similar apps and links it?