I don't know why a Terminal needs a SSO login wall. Seems like after all the glory and hype that the product is getting from HN, the true reality of it is that it is a data collection farm.
Because it's a "growth & engagement" cancer that happens to have some terminal-like functionality with the end-game being to use said growth/engagement to solicit unreasonable amounts of VC funding, not an actual terminal for the purpose to help you get work done.
I'm unsure how you rationalize calling the criticism naive, while at the same time 5 minutes later acknowledging and suggesting solutions for the exact same.
* At least some of that criticism is bad in this particular way. (As per an individual opinion.)
* Here's a way to communicate the same criticism that is not bad in that particular way.
As compared to the bug report:
> I downloaded warp for the first time based on a link someone sent me about it being in public beta, but I'm immediately presented with a login form that I cannot dismiss. I know I cannot be the only developer who would never do a cloud login to use a terminal, let alone do it without any indication why it's needed or what it implies will be collected/transmitted to the warp team.
Which is describing the software working as the developers intended and calling that a bug. Criticism can be expected to be better.
Thanks for the feedback - I'm the founder at Warp.
There was a ton of discussion on this yesterday with our ShowHN [0] and we are considering what changes to make based on the feedback (some of which are inline with your suggestions).
And we are committed to making telemetry optional when we leave beta.
And it's definitely the case that command input / output are never sent to the server.
Login is a bit trickier as it's hard to build an app that leverages the internet and facilitates teamwork without understanding user identity. But point taken.
> Login is a bit trickier as it's hard to build an app that leverages the internet and facilitates teamwork without understanding user identity. But point taken.
I thought the team/collab functions would just be optional features. First and foremost, isn't this a terminal still?
> Login is a bit trickier as it's hard to build an app that leverages the internet and facilitates teamwork without understanding user identity. But point taken.
I think you need to understand that this is a rare edge case and at least 95-99% of users do not want or need this. A terminal is a terminal, a command line shell. There are countless tools within it that have been developed for decades that provide collaboration: Git is a nice example. The shell itself is localized and user authentication is handled by the system.
What exactly is there to be worked on in collaboration on a command line? Only one person can type or execute commands on it at the same time, and even worse, it is a very sensitive part of any system and the whole point of TTY and session management is to NOT have it as a shared resource.
Don't get me wrong, there are features of your product that look very nice and have almost convinced me to switch to it (until I saw the SSO screen), but the way you approach this rings all possible alarm bells and demonstrates a deep and fundamental lack of understanding of what you are trying to re-invent.
I hesitated to install it because of the telemetry reported by other HN users.
I eventually installed it because of curiosity, but blocked its connections, and it refused to work, so I relented and unblocked them because of curiosity.
I deleted it because it was crap. iTerm does what I need and want. Warp does not.
> Finally, as a general UX improvement, it might be nice to not require GH auth out of the box, but after a few hours of usage, say "Consider logging in with GH to get ". That's a much less confronting way to present authentication.
14 comments
[ 4.6 ms ] story [ 43.7 ms ] threadI don't know why a Terminal needs a SSO login wall. Seems like after all the glory and hype that the product is getting from HN, the true reality of it is that it is a data collection farm.
I don't think anyone wants that.
A terminal emulator with advanced features that are company/team aware and with collaboration features isn't a bad idea.
Product telemetry to understand in general terms how your software is being used so that you can focus efforts isn't a bad idea.
The problems with Warp are:
1. They are being vague about what telemetry they send, creating a risk that sensitive data flowing through the application may be included.
2. It can't be turned off, even temporarily. Under many computer security policies at companies this is going to prevent Warp from being used at all.
My suggestion would be:
- Remove the login requirement to use a fully local version of the application.
- Separate telemetry from service-backed smart features, allow each to be toggled individually.
- Make it clear that terminal text input/output is never shared, or be very specific about when it is so that users can understand the security risk.
- Don't associate telemetry with users or anonymise where possible.
I think the issues are more nuanced than that.
* There is a lot of criticism.
* At least some of that criticism is bad in this particular way. (As per an individual opinion.)
* Here's a way to communicate the same criticism that is not bad in that particular way.
As compared to the bug report:
> I downloaded warp for the first time based on a link someone sent me about it being in public beta, but I'm immediately presented with a login form that I cannot dismiss. I know I cannot be the only developer who would never do a cloud login to use a terminal, let alone do it without any indication why it's needed or what it implies will be collected/transmitted to the warp team.
Which is describing the software working as the developers intended and calling that a bug. Criticism can be expected to be better.
There was a ton of discussion on this yesterday with our ShowHN [0] and we are considering what changes to make based on the feedback (some of which are inline with your suggestions).
We do publish all the telemetry we collect here:
https://docs.warp.dev/getting-started/privacy#exhaustive-tel...
And we are committed to making telemetry optional when we leave beta.
And it's definitely the case that command input / output are never sent to the server.
Login is a bit trickier as it's hard to build an app that leverages the internet and facilitates teamwork without understanding user identity. But point taken.
[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30921231
I thought the team/collab functions would just be optional features. First and foremost, isn't this a terminal still?
I think you need to understand that this is a rare edge case and at least 95-99% of users do not want or need this. A terminal is a terminal, a command line shell. There are countless tools within it that have been developed for decades that provide collaboration: Git is a nice example. The shell itself is localized and user authentication is handled by the system.
What exactly is there to be worked on in collaboration on a command line? Only one person can type or execute commands on it at the same time, and even worse, it is a very sensitive part of any system and the whole point of TTY and session management is to NOT have it as a shared resource.
Don't get me wrong, there are features of your product that look very nice and have almost convinced me to switch to it (until I saw the SSO screen), but the way you approach this rings all possible alarm bells and demonstrates a deep and fundamental lack of understanding of what you are trying to re-invent.
I eventually installed it because of curiosity, but blocked its connections, and it refused to work, so I relented and unblocked them because of curiosity.
I deleted it because it was crap. iTerm does what I need and want. Warp does not.
Tempest in a teacup!
Nag screens in my terminal! I can't wait...