I immediately tried Circuits, because I have a lot of expertise here and realised it was expected: absolutely zero understanding of the product domain. It looks like an EDA package, it smells like an EDA package but an EDA package it ain't.
And I don't want to hear "it's alpha" and "it'll improve over time". The very foundation it is built on is a near zero understanding of the domain.
This is exactly the same as all the sudden Lightroom and Photoshop replacements.
I created schematic, pcb. Then exported Gerbers as zip and it passed and looks ok at jlcpcb. So it's usable.
I added one issue (allow to change default trace width) and we'll see how it goes. If they actually fix it, with maybe 30 another similar fixes it could be usable.
Why should I when there's KiCad on the market? Or even pay for Altium?
Put a usable product on the market from day one or don't bother. There's absolutely no proof you will deliver anything here. This is just slavery to an inferior promise in the name of progress.
I'm not patting this on the head and waiting and expecting it to grow up into a work dog.
I see no evidence that you're committed to it getting better over time. Tell me again in a year or two when something you've made has actually gotten usable. Until then, build your credibility by making something good, not just making a sloppy copy.
I want to see good, small, focused tools that are highly polished and (user) tested, and fit into a bigger ecosystem that can be mashed up and adapted on the fly to fit the task you have. Just porting existing mega-apps doesn’t seem appealing at all. They are still going to be as inflexible and overwhelming, and much rougher around the edges.
> good, small, focused tools that are highly polished and (user) tested, and fit into a bigger ecosystem that can be mashed up and adapted on the fly to fit the task you have
i wish i could use the shell this way; some of my colleagues could pipe things in between /usr/bin utilities all day for things i'd need a script for
I think eventually the smaller focused tools will win the market by a wide margin. But for now, there is huge demand for open-source and free alternatives to mega apps. Especially for the education/non-profit sector.
shoving all of these vastly different applications into one monorepo does not bode well for them being seriously designed, maintained, and cared-about pieces of software. such is the nature of LLM development, i suppose.
not to mention that there are only three contributors and #2 is claude, although that might be because they just committed a bunch of previously-untracked code at once, i don't care to check.
I feel like you're being snarky but, regardless, I'm curious to hear your reasoning for the first paragraph. being a monorepo helps us share code across 50 different apps without falling into a submodule/dependency hell.
What's shared between the "Property Management" and "Photo Studio"?
The UI frameworks already exist, there's 0 reason to share more things between them. That is, unless it has a slopped revolutionary(tm) UI framework #1000.
I might be missing something but inspecting a few of them the testing seems quite thin. I won’t do anything now without layers of controls for agent coding. Just for testing — near 100s for v8 coverage, property, mutation, fuzz, chaos, contract, bdd e2e, api and playwright exploratory mcp. Long term maintenance of all of this is going to need a ci/cd that puts all that through a ringer around the clock.
there are other ways to share code than a monorepo, namely independently versioned packages. you say dependency hell but if you're in control of everything you're in the best position to avoid that if you put thought into it. with a monorepo you could actually get worse results in some cases. say i change something in a graphics api for sudoku and suddenly the zoom clone doesn't work. yuck. i only buy the monorepo argument for systems of code that actually need to be deployed in sync, like server/client stuff or larger. iirc google has a massive monorepo for nearly all of their production code because basically all of it works together (server/client stuff, auth, etc)
also a monorepo like this is worse for human interaction, if you care. what if someone only wants to pull and work on sudoku? now they have to get everything else. issues and pull requests are also more annoying to varying degrees depending on use.
additionally, somewhere in the agent prompt i asked it to maximize app functionality without the user having to sign in. for most office/creative/engineering apps this should work very well in the long term (fingers crossed)
This is the worst kind of slop. The kind where someone doesn't exhibit any concern for quality or user experience. I know that's so, because it's a gazillion unrelated apps that clone existing huge apps, built by a couple of people and Claude.
The reality of launching a good product with AI is that the coding is very fast, but the QC, the documentation, the refinement and user testing, isn't all that much faster, if you care about it being good.
This is a mountain of code, full of bugs and weirdness that users will be the first to find, because nobody else is looking at it.
My process for building with AI is "intense weekend of vibe coding" and then several times that time spent on refinement and testing that comes from actually using the software a lot. A couple of devs can't be responsible for every major application.
With AI, you can make anything you want, but you can't make everything.
I was hoping this link would be to VoidTools’ Everything [0] which - unlike this repo - is a very useful utility.
I’m all for recreating software, especially to be faster, cleaner, smaller, and more bespoke - but trying to one-shot a whole suite will never work. Building these foundational office-y tools requires an immense amount of testing and attention.
The arrogance required to think you can vibe code everything. I am all for LLM generated replacements for the rent-seeking garbage that permeates software, but this is not the answer. Tools developed by people who use them are the future. Instead, I guarantee this person has the same mindset as the Adobe management he’s trying to displace: create what looks like a useful tool with minimal effort and rely on scale to beat everyone else.
Opportunistic vultures who vibe code products with no mental investment in what customers want, no testing, no thought. This is the antithesis of Hacking; the antithesis of building a product for customers.
Looked at authors other project, https://github.com/heyputer/puter, and I am perhaps missing their motivation, but I stand by the result.
This is the kind of thing I might have written in my youth: "Hey, all these disparate computers and systems, and my generation has this amazing new platform: javascript web views. Maybe I can solve this problem by making a new platform, that runs everywhere!"
Doing this for its own sake is Hacking. It's a fun project and would require a lot of learning through experience.
However, it suffers from the xkxd://Standards problem in the first case, and in the second misses the fact that I prefer macOS while some of my colleagues prefer windows. It is also fundamentally naive. Perhaps arrogance was too strong a word. It might be a lack of experience or might be dunning-kruger, but these tools are far more complex than it appears the author grasps. One comment from HN on the puter project was that it doesn't have any kind of security - it seemed to be as trusting as a 1998 Windows computer.
My main complaint still stands: this was written by someone with little thought about what the user wants. It is clear what the author wants, given previous projects: One giant system that Does Everything. Only the author wants this. Users want specific tools that have been refined and improved by an invested development team with expert domain knowledge.
I don't understand why you'd build an operating system that has to work on top of the operating system you have to use to run the browser that runs your operating system so you can use the apps that run on your operating system that run in the browser that's running on an operating system that has versions of the app you're running in the browser that's running your operating system.
Are people not aware that every single one of these already had open source, self-hosted alternatives? Why do we need to add a pile of slop-code knockoffs? Why does it need to be one giant repo? Does this person have any experience building and releasing software that wasn't built and released for them by a robot?
> Does this person have any experience building and releasing software that wasn't built and released for them by a robot?
I built https://github.com/heyputer/puter. What have you done? Because your GitHub is pretty empty: https://github.com/etchalon, and your company's website doesn't redirect to https. Doesn't inspire much confidence when you're not even doing the basic stuff right, does it?
`puter` looks like a great project and vastly more interesting than the slop-code knock-offs you're doing with `everything`. I don't know why you pivoted from "genuinely interesting idea with real intent and thought" to slop.
As for the "what I've done" ad hominem, yeah ... I don't spend a lot of time working on open-source anything because I run a services-based agency. My "computer time" hours go to billable work, and I don't have a ton of time to spend on open-source anything. So my personal public GitHub is mostly empty and my agency one (https://github.com/thisismess?q=&type=source&language=&sort=) isn't much better.
Basically, I'm a professional who writes code for money and when not writing code for money, I do other things.
As for TLS, it's a static site with a contact form my cofounder threw together in a weekend because our previous site was like 8 years old. No one noticed or cared we'd forgot to check the box in Cloudflare to enforce TLS. But it's deeply hilarious to lean on that as some type of "rebuttal".
The site gets 10 hits a week.
Nothing I posted was "attacking you personally" beyond asking some fairly basic questions based entirely on the quality of the repo posted here.
Because it's deeply hard to look at this and think "This person has expertise and experience in software design" and not "someone told Claude to make them a product and they’d like some credit for that.”
I like the idea of replacing entrenched proprietary apps with familiar UIs, using AI.
I'm not the first to say that AI is enabling a fracturing of these projects, though. There's this, and also "ArtCraft" I think, which seem to be trying the exact same thing. I wonder if there is still a place in the AI era for separate projects to merge efforts and processes to accelerate the development of quality clones.
I immediately tried Circuits, because I have a lot of expertise here and realised it was expected: absolutely zero understanding of the product domain. It looks like an EDA package, it smells like an EDA package but an EDA package it ain't.
And I don't want to hear "it's alpha" and "it'll improve over time". The very foundation it is built on is a near zero understanding of the domain.
This is exactly the same as all the sudden Lightroom and Photoshop replacements.
I created schematic, pcb. Then exported Gerbers as zip and it passed and looks ok at jlcpcb. So it's usable.
I added one issue (allow to change default trace width) and we'll see how it goes. If they actually fix it, with maybe 30 another similar fixes it could be usable.
Turns out product design is a lot harder than "Make me a product. Don't make any mistakes."
Yes that.
it'll get better over time. Give it some time!
Why should I when there's KiCad on the market? Or even pay for Altium?
Put a usable product on the market from day one or don't bother. There's absolutely no proof you will deliver anything here. This is just slavery to an inferior promise in the name of progress.
I'm not patting this on the head and waiting and expecting it to grow up into a work dog.
makes sense. some people like this project and are waiting for it to get better. it's a free market, you can use whatever you like most.
> Put a usable product on the market from day one or don't bother.
Tall words for someone recommending KiCad.
KiCad does an ok job. This does not even do job.
KiCad day-one was probably not what you'd call a "usable" EDA suite either.
But it was an EDA suite, not an EDA suite shaped object.
I see no evidence that you're committed to it getting better over time. Tell me again in a year or two when something you've made has actually gotten usable. Until then, build your credibility by making something good, not just making a sloppy copy.
Don't sloppy that copy!
I want to see good, small, focused tools that are highly polished and (user) tested, and fit into a bigger ecosystem that can be mashed up and adapted on the fly to fit the task you have. Just porting existing mega-apps doesn’t seem appealing at all. They are still going to be as inflexible and overwhelming, and much rougher around the edges.
> good, small, focused tools that are highly polished and (user) tested, and fit into a bigger ecosystem that can be mashed up and adapted on the fly to fit the task you have
i wish i could use the shell this way; some of my colleagues could pipe things in between /usr/bin utilities all day for things i'd need a script for
I think eventually the smaller focused tools will win the market by a wide margin. But for now, there is huge demand for open-source and free alternatives to mega apps. Especially for the education/non-profit sector.
There are already open-source and free alternatives for every mega app.
true. we're throwing our hat in the ring too and some people like it, some don't. regardless, more options for everybody...
shoving all of these vastly different applications into one monorepo does not bode well for them being seriously designed, maintained, and cared-about pieces of software. such is the nature of LLM development, i suppose.
not to mention that there are only three contributors and #2 is claude, although that might be because they just committed a bunch of previously-untracked code at once, i don't care to check.
> shoving all of these ...
I feel like you're being snarky but, regardless, I'm curious to hear your reasoning for the first paragraph. being a monorepo helps us share code across 50 different apps without falling into a submodule/dependency hell.
What's shared between the "Property Management" and "Photo Studio"?
The UI frameworks already exist, there's 0 reason to share more things between them. That is, unless it has a slopped revolutionary(tm) UI framework #1000.
I might be missing something but inspecting a few of them the testing seems quite thin. I won’t do anything now without layers of controls for agent coding. Just for testing — near 100s for v8 coverage, property, mutation, fuzz, chaos, contract, bdd e2e, api and playwright exploratory mcp. Long term maintenance of all of this is going to need a ci/cd that puts all that through a ringer around the clock.
there are other ways to share code than a monorepo, namely independently versioned packages. you say dependency hell but if you're in control of everything you're in the best position to avoid that if you put thought into it. with a monorepo you could actually get worse results in some cases. say i change something in a graphics api for sudoku and suddenly the zoom clone doesn't work. yuck. i only buy the monorepo argument for systems of code that actually need to be deployed in sync, like server/client stuff or larger. iirc google has a massive monorepo for nearly all of their production code because basically all of it works together (server/client stuff, auth, etc)
also a monorepo like this is worse for human interaction, if you care. what if someone only wants to pull and work on sudoku? now they have to get everything else. issues and pull requests are also more annoying to varying degrees depending on use.
for this project, doesn't look like much effort has gone into sharing assets.
Monorepo's don't solve dependency hell. They amplify it.
1,000 great shareware programs on one CD!
Pressing "Try it" makes an app load up instantly. That should at least give people who create bloatware some pause.
Thank you for trying them out :)
additionally, somewhere in the agent prompt i asked it to maximize app functionality without the user having to sign in. for most office/creative/engineering apps this should work very well in the long term (fingers crossed)
I tried Document and it complained about font kerning support and wouldn't let me do anything.
yeah, I'm aware. working on it.
This is the worst kind of slop. The kind where someone doesn't exhibit any concern for quality or user experience. I know that's so, because it's a gazillion unrelated apps that clone existing huge apps, built by a couple of people and Claude.
The reality of launching a good product with AI is that the coding is very fast, but the QC, the documentation, the refinement and user testing, isn't all that much faster, if you care about it being good.
This is a mountain of code, full of bugs and weirdness that users will be the first to find, because nobody else is looking at it.
My process for building with AI is "intense weekend of vibe coding" and then several times that time spent on refinement and testing that comes from actually using the software a lot. A couple of devs can't be responsible for every major application.
With AI, you can make anything you want, but you can't make everything.
I was hoping this link would be to VoidTools’ Everything [0] which - unlike this repo - is a very useful utility.
I’m all for recreating software, especially to be faster, cleaner, smaller, and more bespoke - but trying to one-shot a whole suite will never work. Building these foundational office-y tools requires an immense amount of testing and attention.
[0]: https://www.voidtools.com/
Rebuilding the world's software in one repo, all in Javascript, what could go wrong?
I'd love to hear the story behind this. Motivation, methodology, alternatives considered, etc.
Reminds me of that recent post saying "we should be more ambitious with software" on the front page.
This certainly checks that box!
All in Javascript? Pass.
Things went out of hand incredibly quickly after we got REA...
https://github.com/morluto/rea
Hello, LibreOffice? Anyone?
Consider https://github.com/storytold
The arrogance required to think you can vibe code everything. I am all for LLM generated replacements for the rent-seeking garbage that permeates software, but this is not the answer. Tools developed by people who use them are the future. Instead, I guarantee this person has the same mindset as the Adobe management he’s trying to displace: create what looks like a useful tool with minimal effort and rely on scale to beat everyone else.
I'm curious why it's so upsetting to you. What does the existence of this repo represent to you that you hate?
Opportunistic vultures who vibe code products with no mental investment in what customers want, no testing, no thought. This is the antithesis of Hacking; the antithesis of building a product for customers.
Looked at authors other project, https://github.com/heyputer/puter, and I am perhaps missing their motivation, but I stand by the result.
This is the kind of thing I might have written in my youth: "Hey, all these disparate computers and systems, and my generation has this amazing new platform: javascript web views. Maybe I can solve this problem by making a new platform, that runs everywhere!"
Doing this for its own sake is Hacking. It's a fun project and would require a lot of learning through experience.
However, it suffers from the xkxd://Standards problem in the first case, and in the second misses the fact that I prefer macOS while some of my colleagues prefer windows. It is also fundamentally naive. Perhaps arrogance was too strong a word. It might be a lack of experience or might be dunning-kruger, but these tools are far more complex than it appears the author grasps. One comment from HN on the puter project was that it doesn't have any kind of security - it seemed to be as trusting as a 1998 Windows computer.
My main complaint still stands: this was written by someone with little thought about what the user wants. It is clear what the author wants, given previous projects: One giant system that Does Everything. Only the author wants this. Users want specific tools that have been refined and improved by an invested development team with expert domain knowledge.
I don't understand why you'd build an operating system that has to work on top of the operating system you have to use to run the browser that runs your operating system so you can use the apps that run on your operating system that run in the browser that's running on an operating system that has versions of the app you're running in the browser that's running your operating system.
Nobody got fired for buying Microsoft. [0]
[0] https://www.neowin.net/news/denmark-has-abandoned-plans-to-d...
Are people not aware that every single one of these already had open source, self-hosted alternatives? Why do we need to add a pile of slop-code knockoffs? Why does it need to be one giant repo? Does this person have any experience building and releasing software that wasn't built and released for them by a robot?
not just person, AI startup! this'll be the one to save the world, i bet
Since you're attacking me personally,
> Does this person have any experience building and releasing software that wasn't built and released for them by a robot?
I built https://github.com/heyputer/puter. What have you done? Because your GitHub is pretty empty: https://github.com/etchalon, and your company's website doesn't redirect to https. Doesn't inspire much confidence when you're not even doing the basic stuff right, does it?
`puter` looks like a great project and vastly more interesting than the slop-code knock-offs you're doing with `everything`. I don't know why you pivoted from "genuinely interesting idea with real intent and thought" to slop.
As for the "what I've done" ad hominem, yeah ... I don't spend a lot of time working on open-source anything because I run a services-based agency. My "computer time" hours go to billable work, and I don't have a ton of time to spend on open-source anything. So my personal public GitHub is mostly empty and my agency one (https://github.com/thisismess?q=&type=source&language=&sort=) isn't much better.
Basically, I'm a professional who writes code for money and when not writing code for money, I do other things.
As for TLS, it's a static site with a contact form my cofounder threw together in a weekend because our previous site was like 8 years old. No one noticed or cared we'd forgot to check the box in Cloudflare to enforce TLS. But it's deeply hilarious to lean on that as some type of "rebuttal".
The site gets 10 hits a week.
Nothing I posted was "attacking you personally" beyond asking some fairly basic questions based entirely on the quality of the repo posted here.
Because it's deeply hard to look at this and think "This person has expertise and experience in software design" and not "someone told Claude to make them a product and they’d like some credit for that.”
I like the idea of replacing entrenched proprietary apps with familiar UIs, using AI.
I'm not the first to say that AI is enabling a fracturing of these projects, though. There's this, and also "ArtCraft" I think, which seem to be trying the exact same thing. I wonder if there is still a place in the AI era for separate projects to merge efforts and processes to accelerate the development of quality clones.
[flagged]
This is fake. No I will not elaborate, I don't feed trolls
You are troll, No I will not elaborate, I don't feed fakers
[dead]