My first thought was, "So, Replit and ilk?", seems they expected that comparison:
> How is Glaze different from Lovable, Replit, or v0?
> Those tools build for the browser. Glaze builds for your desktop. That means your apps can access your file system, your camera, keyboard shortcuts, menu bar integration, and background processes. Things a web app can’t do. It’s a different category entirely.
Pretty sure modern web apps can do all of those (sans menu bar). (If anything they do background processes better since you can send a very long task off to a server and shut off your computer, come back later and pick up where you left off.)
Also, as others mentioned, this just seems like Claude Code with extra steps, unless they managed to nail some sort of design standard enforcement they feel is better than what most people can get out of it.
The quick publishing is kind of nice, but it immediately made me think it would be more interesting to have a way to quickly remix other people's creations, similar to the Figma Community tab: you can take someone else's work, break it apart to see how it works, then tweak it how you want it.
tshaddox 19 minutes ago [-]
> Also, as others mentioned, this just seems like Claude Code with extra steps, unless they managed to nail some sort of design standard enforcement they feel is better than what most people can get out of it.
Well yeah, isn’t that criticism we’ve had every LLM wrapper for years now? “Show me the prompt!” But that doesn’t mean these types of products are useless.
nateb2022 20 minutes ago [-]
> Also, as others mentioned, this just seems like Claude Code with extra steps, unless they managed to nail some sort of design standard enforcement they feel is better than what most people can get out of it.
My feeling is that it's intended for a less-technical audience than Claude Code.
twalichiewicz 12 minutes ago [-]
I can certainly see that. If they really did manage to make some really effective design tooling, would be a great candidate for an MCP server.
varun_ch 39 minutes ago [-]
A big thing would be API requests/browser automation. Web apps can’t do that without a backend proxy due to CORS
jeroenhd 8 minutes ago [-]
> Pretty sure modern web apps can do all of those
If you're on Chrome and give them permission, or stuff them into Electron and friends, they can. The workflow isn't as smooth as with native applications, though.
On the other hand, the web browser does protect you from some of the risks this essentially "trust me bro" curl2bash-as-a-service product inherently comes with.
sporksmith 20 minutes ago [-]
I thought this must be a joke at first. "Glaze" is in pretty heavy use as recent slang for "when someone excessively praises another person in a way that feels over-the-top." https://creativesimiles.com/glaze-meaning-slang/
ie the annoying way that LLMs interact with users
freetonik 8 minutes ago [-]
Ironically, there's another project named Glaze, that aims to "protect artists from generative AI" (https://glaze.cs.uchicago.edu/)
prodigycorp 42 minutes ago [-]
Someone please exfiltrate their prompts/skills so i can use these on Codex. I've have relative success building my own apps for mac using Codex but they're uglier than sin and dont seem to understand well how permissions work.
Having antigravity is useful because Gemini 3.1 is pretty good at generating UI sugar. Claude 4.6 Opus provides nothing to write home about. Their shadcn looksmaxxing hasn't generalized to writing good desktop UIs.
Raycast's only edge here seems to be the fact that they are obviously very good at Mac app development and probably have impeccable skills/documentation for building them.
Taking a step back, it's pretty clear that Raycast is angling for an Apple acquisition here with this play. If I'm Apple, the reason to buy a product/team like this is a no-brainer.
freetonik 6 minutes ago [-]
>Taking a step back, it's pretty clear that Raycast is angling for an Apple acquisition here with this play.
Raycast recently made a Windows version. So perhaps they aren't as Apple-centric.
mgrandl 9 minutes ago [-]
Raycast are not building Mac apps the apple way though. They are using react native and I am willing to bet that this does too.
rafram 12 minutes ago [-]
> Taking a step back, it's pretty clear that Raycast is angling for an Apple acquisition here with this play.
No kidding, although I think Apple would only be interested if it uses SwiftUI. (The marketing page doesn't say. Raycast itself uses React + Node for extensions, but its React components render to native widgets.)
sangeeth96 11 minutes ago [-]
Looking forward to trying this out and see how this differs from more manual approaches. One thing that stands out is an included store for public/private distribution — that’s super convenient given the cumbersome (and maybe, horrific) process that is the app store submission.
geooff_ 7 minutes ago [-]
This is just a landing page. There's not even any decent product specs. Nothing technical. How does this make front page of hacker news?
lorenzoguerra 55 minutes ago [-]
I cannot bring myself to trust unreviewed software enough to install it on my own machine with arbitrary permissions. I understand the push for AI-generated websites, because the code running in my browser's sandbox is gonna have very limited permissions to do anything evil, but desktop apps are a completely different story
foo4u 49 minutes ago [-]
Claude Code is pretty good at Swift + Swift UI. I created and have been iterating on a menubar app for myself that I plan to share with a small team. I'd prefer to do this native than go through a 3rd party solution.
I do have prior experience developing for iOS but that was pre-swift.
mrklol 27 minutes ago [-]
Same thought I had while reading, don’t really see a big advantage here.
codeptualize 29 minutes ago [-]
No mention of security.. remarkable
Hamuko 25 minutes ago [-]
The “S” in “Glaze” stands for “security”.
mattcantstop 26 minutes ago [-]
Makes sense to me. It's a marketing page. Know your audience.
robinhood 21 minutes ago [-]
Impressive feat. Definitely not for me though, and for sure I won't be there to debug one of these when my parents will call me because it broke their computers.
smusamashah 28 minutes ago [-]
It will be awesome if these were native apps instead of JavaScript apps. It's not mentioned anywhere explicitly that these are native.
Bishonen88 52 minutes ago [-]
So, another wrapper around claude 4.6 for +xx% higher price? Using just claude code, one can do what glazeapp seems to aim for, no? "Beautiful by default" seems to be a system prompt akin to:
Design Philosophy Create apps that feel premium, polished, and worthy of being featured on Dribbble's most popular shots. Every pixel matters. White space is your friend. Less is more, but what remains must be perfect.
Visual Design Principles
Color & Theming
• Use sophisticated, limited color palettes (2-3 primary colors maximum) ...
xd1936 49 minutes ago [-]
It looks like it's a lot of sensible defaults UI libraries to use, UX framework presets, etc, designed for an end user who doesn't know what Node or Electron or Rust or Tauri are. Plus, the page describes an app sharing mechanism as well built-in.
alxndr13 49 minutes ago [-]
To be honest, but I would love to have some ecosystem around building apps which lets me share my custom apps with team members in my organization. Without having to take care of updating, provisioning, and distributing the app, etc.
even better if the apps are not electron bloated and mac-native.
mcintyre1994 38 minutes ago [-]
I think their value add if you’re comfortable with Claude Code is probably some nice tooling for the packaging, and they probably sign apps for you too?
wbobeirne 45 minutes ago [-]
Reading what they're offering, the stand-out to me is making publishing the applications easy for others on your team to use. That would he a pain point for non technical users.
Bishonen88 37 minutes ago [-]
I get your point. But if sharing with others is a vital part of this, then ... they'd be better off sticking to web apps instead :)
"Create with glaze, hit publish and we'll give you an url".
Even though they portray some of the benefits of this app as unique to desktop apps, they're not (e.g. storing data on device, offline mode etc.).
Am not a hater. Love Raycast. Saw the post and opened the link intrigued what they came up with and was somewhat disappointed tbh. Good luck to them anyway!
bpavuk 22 minutes ago [-]
so many unknowns...
1. macOS and Windows require installation of Xcode and Visual Studio respectively, and if in Apple's case you kinda can install these tools headlessly and choose to install only the "build tools" package, Microsoft's creature is gonna daze and confuse you with a crap-ton of checkboxes and no easy "just install whatever is minimally needed to compile my code" button, and I don't recall if there is way to install build tools on Windows through terminal.
2. what is going to be distributed? source code itself or actual binaries? and what will the security model of Glaze store be? same as extensions, "everything is open-source and undergoes Raycast's and community review"?
3. Glaze is going to come to Windows and Linux, if we trust the Q&A section at the end. what will Glaze build upon? separate frameworks and languages for each platform or something multi-platform [1] like Tauri or Kotlin Multiplatform? or are you going to copy the Raycast extension model - just run Node, expose some platform integration, and parse React render trees through "Glaze Runtime"? I've been working on a bug in Vicinae [2][3], and I've seen this model in action. it's very hard to make it perform well, but all it takes to achieve native look and feel is to just map React render trees to whatever system component OS offers. (in Vicinae's case, it's Qt. bet that it's done with SwiftUI on macOS and WinUI 3 on Windows.)
[1]: there is a difference between "cross-platform" and "multi-platform". "cross-platform" means "I behave equally across platforms and have no awareness of native look and feel" (e.g. Electron, Unity, Flutter), while "multi-platform" means "I can adapt across platforms to the degree you need" (e.g. C/C++, Rust, KMP)
what about barebone/starter desktop app that can be modified itself by prompts?
that's would be Electron app, but without unneeded bloat
mcjiggerlog 53 minutes ago [-]
This looks super fun, actually.
I wonder what it is actually building. Tauri apps, maybe?
rockwotj 48 minutes ago [-]
One would think it must otherwise there are all these issues with compiling, signing tc if they don’t have xcode installed etc. I would guess it’s some webview wrapper with a layer to expose desktop app functionality
rockwotj 48 minutes ago [-]
Or it’s compiled in the cloud?
coffeebeqn 12 minutes ago [-]
Electron I bet
orliesaurus 48 minutes ago [-]
they did it again, glad I am on Mac, congrats raycast
Fervicus 30 minutes ago [-]
"Insecure apps, reimagined by you"
irenetusuq 18 minutes ago [-]
[dead]
grincek 58 minutes ago [-]
[dead]
Rendered at 14:36:03 GMT+0000 (Coordinated Universal Time) with Vercel.
My first thought was, "So, Replit and ilk?", seems they expected that comparison:
> How is Glaze different from Lovable, Replit, or v0?
> Those tools build for the browser. Glaze builds for your desktop. That means your apps can access your file system, your camera, keyboard shortcuts, menu bar integration, and background processes. Things a web app can’t do. It’s a different category entirely.
Pretty sure modern web apps can do all of those (sans menu bar). (If anything they do background processes better since you can send a very long task off to a server and shut off your computer, come back later and pick up where you left off.)
Also, as others mentioned, this just seems like Claude Code with extra steps, unless they managed to nail some sort of design standard enforcement they feel is better than what most people can get out of it.
The quick publishing is kind of nice, but it immediately made me think it would be more interesting to have a way to quickly remix other people's creations, similar to the Figma Community tab: you can take someone else's work, break it apart to see how it works, then tweak it how you want it.
Well yeah, isn’t that criticism we’ve had every LLM wrapper for years now? “Show me the prompt!” But that doesn’t mean these types of products are useless.
My feeling is that it's intended for a less-technical audience than Claude Code.
If you're on Chrome and give them permission, or stuff them into Electron and friends, they can. The workflow isn't as smooth as with native applications, though.
On the other hand, the web browser does protect you from some of the risks this essentially "trust me bro" curl2bash-as-a-service product inherently comes with.
ie the annoying way that LLMs interact with users
Having antigravity is useful because Gemini 3.1 is pretty good at generating UI sugar. Claude 4.6 Opus provides nothing to write home about. Their shadcn looksmaxxing hasn't generalized to writing good desktop UIs.
Raycast's only edge here seems to be the fact that they are obviously very good at Mac app development and probably have impeccable skills/documentation for building them.
Taking a step back, it's pretty clear that Raycast is angling for an Apple acquisition here with this play. If I'm Apple, the reason to buy a product/team like this is a no-brainer.
Raycast recently made a Windows version. So perhaps they aren't as Apple-centric.
No kidding, although I think Apple would only be interested if it uses SwiftUI. (The marketing page doesn't say. Raycast itself uses React + Node for extensions, but its React components render to native widgets.)
I do have prior experience developing for iOS but that was pre-swift.
even better if the apps are not electron bloated and mac-native.
Even though they portray some of the benefits of this app as unique to desktop apps, they're not (e.g. storing data on device, offline mode etc.).
Am not a hater. Love Raycast. Saw the post and opened the link intrigued what they came up with and was somewhat disappointed tbh. Good luck to them anyway!
1. macOS and Windows require installation of Xcode and Visual Studio respectively, and if in Apple's case you kinda can install these tools headlessly and choose to install only the "build tools" package, Microsoft's creature is gonna daze and confuse you with a crap-ton of checkboxes and no easy "just install whatever is minimally needed to compile my code" button, and I don't recall if there is way to install build tools on Windows through terminal.
2. what is going to be distributed? source code itself or actual binaries? and what will the security model of Glaze store be? same as extensions, "everything is open-source and undergoes Raycast's and community review"?
3. Glaze is going to come to Windows and Linux, if we trust the Q&A section at the end. what will Glaze build upon? separate frameworks and languages for each platform or something multi-platform [1] like Tauri or Kotlin Multiplatform? or are you going to copy the Raycast extension model - just run Node, expose some platform integration, and parse React render trees through "Glaze Runtime"? I've been working on a bug in Vicinae [2][3], and I've seen this model in action. it's very hard to make it perform well, but all it takes to achieve native look and feel is to just map React render trees to whatever system component OS offers. (in Vicinae's case, it's Qt. bet that it's done with SwiftUI on macOS and WinUI 3 on Windows.)
[1]: there is a difference between "cross-platform" and "multi-platform". "cross-platform" means "I behave equally across platforms and have no awareness of native look and feel" (e.g. Electron, Unity, Flutter), while "multi-platform" means "I can adapt across platforms to the degree you need" (e.g. C/C++, Rust, KMP)
[2]: https://github.com/vicinaehq/vicinae
[3]: https://github.com/vicinaehq/vicinae/pull/1158
that's would be Electron app, but without unneeded bloat
I wonder what it is actually building. Tauri apps, maybe?