Wow what abusive behavior!<p>Just because a tool is OSS doesn't mean it will be community driven, and it also doesn't mean the publisher is subservient to the community's whims. OSS just means you have options when you are done with the publisher.<p>The irony is that the whining is support for M1. If this was about running on something less proprietary than Apple maybe I would sympathize more.<p>Signal is a great product. I just sent them a donation in response to the disgusting behavior witnessed.
> If you want a bad treatment in developer community, this is the way to go.<p>Expectation surely changed in the last years. I have an M1 and don't expect any software to accommodate my bad choice of platforms, especially if there are ways you can just run it anyway.
I'm wondering why they don't want to support the M1 platform at this time and feel they cannot discuss the reason. For a secure messaging app that smells like there could be some issues with guaranteeing security on the M1 platform. Maybe because they can't see what Apple is doing behind the scenes?<p>I'm not saying M1 had backdoors, just curious that maybe they don't have enough access (or time) to guarantee things?
This is a confusing post- are they complaining only about the desktop app?<p>As far as I know,<p>libsignal-protocol-c =/= Signal Desktop<p>Signal Technology Foundation =/= Signal Messenger LLC<p>So what they are complaining about is that Signal Desktop does not at this time work NATIVELY with M1, while it DOES work with rosetta 2.<p>So what they demand is for the app to work natively rather than through rosetta which indeed does sound like a feature update.<p>Unless I'm mistaken this title is very misleading then.