PC Optimization Company Working with @necros_ow @ardiis @kayjii @kozzyvl @SparkR_OW @sestroyed @ara999_ @Rigsychu @I_am_window @kqzfps @CrysisMR_ @Jimboo_Limbo
Your Kernel
Joined September 2025
- Tweets291
- Following78
- Followers711
- Likes325
Want your whole PC tuned?
Evolve does it in one click. Start free, then go all the way:
⚡ Full Windows + services tuning
⚡ BIOS optimization
⚡ CPU/GPU overclock + RAM timings, done with our team
👉 evolveperf.com
🚀 Your PC might have unnecessary startup apps enabled leading to worse performance.
Here's how to fix it:
1️⃣ Open Evolve Optimizer → Startup Manager
2️⃣ Look through the startup items and disable everything that you don't need.
3️⃣ Not sure what something is? Right-click to open its file location, jump to its registry key, or search the web
Get this and more for free👇
We'd genuinely love to raise this industry together. That starts with crediting the open-source work you build on before someone has to point it out. It doesn't start with three people from your team calling the person who pointed it out a liar.
To be clear: @openmouseapp makes great software and deserves every bit of credit and support they're getting now. That was the only point of our post.
Don't take our word for it. Search the archived code for "OpenMouse" yourself:
Code: web.archive.org/web/20261014…
Page: web.archive.org/web/20261014…
That's our last word on this.
"resort to misinformation and attempts to undermine the work of others" (@TM_RAZ, Head of Partnerships)
Then name one claim that was wrong. Just one. The file is archived with a timestamp, so point to the line.
And whose work was being undermined? The only work that went uncredited in this story was OpenMouse's. Their team built it, and your public beta didn't mention them.
"We've been working with them on the backend for a while, not sure what your problem is." (@travybe_, Marketing VP)
Our problem is simple. If you've worked with OpenMouse "for a while", why did the version you announced to your entire community present it as a HyperTune feature, with OpenMouse's name only surviving in error messages nobody was supposed to see?
Partners credit each other. That's what makes it a partnership.
Now the timeline:
Oct 14, 02:16: public beta announced. No OpenMouse.
Oct 14, 11:40: we post the evidence.
Oct 14, 23:43: a user asks in your Discord "Is this like OpenMouse?". Only then: "in partnership with openmouse".
Oct 15, around midnight: partnership announcement, credit added, license linked, source published.
Everything OpenMouse's license asked for on day one appeared within hours of our post, along with a partnership announcement.
If all of this was planned and agreed long before, why did it take a public callout to happen? Why not credit OpenMouse at launch, or answer us right away with "we're partners, here's the credit"?
Here's what that public beta shipped:
- 7 error messages and 3 storage keys still saying "OpenMouse"
- OpenMouse's own interface text with the name swapped to "Hypertune", including "Hypertune is free and open source, with no accounts, subscriptions, or paid tiers", in an app sold as a subscription
- no OpenMouse credit, no AGPL notice, no source code
OpenMouse is AGPL-3.0. Anyone can use it, and the license asks for exactly three things: credit, the license, and the source. On launch day, none of them were there.
Why did "Hypertune" make it into OpenMouse's text, but "OpenMouse" didn't make it into your credits?
Let's start at the beginning.
Oct 14, 02:16: "HyperTune Mouse Control: Public Beta", sent to @ everyone in your Discord.
"set up your mouse right from HyperTune"
"The whole point of this beta is that we don't have access to every mouse out there"
"Once it's in the HyperTune app you'll get full support, Razer included"
OpenMouse, the project the code comes from, isn't mentioned once. Not in the announcement, not on the site, not in the code's credits.
If this was a partnership all along, why wasn't your partner in your own announcement?
Update: @hypertune_'s team is now calling our post "misinformation". So, Hypertune, we have some questions.
Yesterday we showed that your "Mouse Control" public beta shipped OpenMouse's code without credit or license (quoted below). Within a day, the credit, license and source were added.
Your Co-Founder then wrote: "Let's push to raise this industry up together, not tear each other down."
At the same time, your Marketing VP calls us "bad looks", and your Head of Partnerships accuses us of "misinformation and attempts to undermine the work of others".
So which one is it? Do you want to raise the industry together, or publicly go after the people who point out a problem you fixed within a day?
xitter.cf/EvolveOpt/status/21103…
Hypertune announced "Mouse Control" as a new HyperTune feature: DPI, polling rate, buttons and lighting, written straight to your mouse. The code they ship tells a different story.
It's built on OpenMouse (@openmouseapp), a free open-source mouse control panel. Hypertune's live site, downloaded today:
- "OpenMouse" still appears in 7 of its own error messages and 3 storage keys, word for word from OpenMouse's source
- OpenMouse's own app text is in there with the name swapped. "We're the developers behind OpenMouse" now reads "We're the developers behind Hypertune Mouse Control"
- 71% of OpenMouse's distinctive driver function names are in it, down to the same rare brands
- The page file closely matches OpenMouse's, with OpenMouse's links replaced by a note that says "TODO(hypertune)"
The code made it in. OpenMouse's license notice did not.
OpenMouse is AGPL-3.0. Anyone can reuse it, even commercially. The deal is simple: keep the license notice and give users the full source. We found no OpenMouse or AGPL notice anywhere in their code, no license file on the site, and no source.
It goes one level deeper. Part of OpenMouse's ASUS driver is ported from libratbag, and carries libratbag's MIT copyright notice, which that license requires in all copies or substantial portions. Hypertune's code contains that ported part. The libratbag notice isn't there either.
This isn't a hobby project. @hypertune_ is Intel-backed and sold as a $9.99/month subscription, and the feature is headed into that app. Fun detail: the swapped text in their code says "Hypertune is free and open source, with no accounts, subscriptions, or paid tiers." Hours before announcing this beta, @austincopeland_ celebrated "a new record today for highest amount of @hypertune_ subscribers."
A company setting subscriber records can afford one line of credit to the open-source developers whose work it ships.
If OpenMouse gave separate permission, say so. Otherwise: credit OpenMouse and libratbag, and publish the source, like the license asks.
Receipts in the images. Archived copies, so anyone can check even if it goes offline (Ctrl+F "OpenMouse"):
Hypertune code: web.archive.org/web/20261014…
Hypertune page: web.archive.org/web/20261014…
OpenMouse: github.com/OpenMouse-Project…
Hypertune announced "Mouse Control" as a new HyperTune feature: DPI, polling rate, buttons and lighting, written straight to your mouse. The code they ship tells a different story.
It's built on OpenMouse (@openmouseapp), a free open-source mouse control panel. Hypertune's live site, downloaded today:
- "OpenMouse" still appears in 7 of its own error messages and 3 storage keys, word for word from OpenMouse's source
- OpenMouse's own app text is in there with the name swapped. "We're the developers behind OpenMouse" now reads "We're the developers behind Hypertune Mouse Control"
- 71% of OpenMouse's distinctive driver function names are in it, down to the same rare brands
- The page file closely matches OpenMouse's, with OpenMouse's links replaced by a note that says "TODO(hypertune)"
The code made it in. OpenMouse's license notice did not.
OpenMouse is AGPL-3.0. Anyone can reuse it, even commercially. The deal is simple: keep the license notice and give users the full source. We found no OpenMouse or AGPL notice anywhere in their code, no license file on the site, and no source.
It goes one level deeper. Part of OpenMouse's ASUS driver is ported from libratbag, and carries libratbag's MIT copyright notice, which that license requires in all copies or substantial portions. Hypertune's code contains that ported part. The libratbag notice isn't there either.
This isn't a hobby project. @hypertune_ is Intel-backed and sold as a $9.99/month subscription, and the feature is headed into that app. Fun detail: the swapped text in their code says "Hypertune is free and open source, with no accounts, subscriptions, or paid tiers." Hours before announcing this beta, @austincopeland_ celebrated "a new record today for highest amount of @hypertune_ subscribers."
A company setting subscriber records can afford one line of credit to the open-source developers whose work it ships.
If OpenMouse gave separate permission, say so. Otherwise: credit OpenMouse and libratbag, and publish the source, like the license asks.
Receipts in the images. Archived copies, so anyone can check even if it goes offline (Ctrl+F "OpenMouse"):
Hypertune code: web.archive.org/web/20261014…
Hypertune page: web.archive.org/web/20261014…
OpenMouse: github.com/OpenMouse-Project…