Categories Desktop Apps For You

HomeDeveloper ToolsSourceTower

Tower4.5

Name: Tower
Price: 69.00 $
Rating: 2.25 (47 reviews)

12 May 2020

Version control with Git made easy.

Follow this app Developer website

Overview

Tower is a Git client for OS X that makes using Git easy and more efficient. Users benefit from its elegant and comprehensive interface and a feature set that lets them enjoy the full power of Git.

Tower abstracts Git's complexity in an easy-to-use interface. For example, lots of actions can be performed simply via drag-and-drop, and mistakes can be undone easily. Advanced users can increase their productivity with features like single line staging, submodule support, or the file history.

Features:

git-svn support
File history
git-flow support
Submodule support
git-lfs support
Blame view
Single-line staging (per-line committing)
Cherry-picking
Discard chunks/lines
Direct Github, Bitbucket, Gitlab, GitSwarm, Beanstalk, Visual Studio Team Services, Team Foundation Server and Rhodecode integration
Support for Bitbucket team accounts
Support for full-screen and Retina displays
Many powerful drag-and-drop features include merge, rebase, push /pull to/from remote, apply stash, create new branch, etc.

What's new in Tower

Version 4.5:

New:

Repository Finder: It is now possible to specify directories which Tower should exclude when searching for repositories. You can find this in Tower’s Preferences on the "Advanced" tab
Branches: We have added the option to delete the tracking branch when deleting a local branch

Improved:

Merging: The --no-commit option has been added to the merge dialog through the checkbox "Directly Commit Merged Changes"
Sorting in Dialogs: Remotes are now being sorted by relevance in dialogs
Azure DevOps Pull Requests: We have improved error mapping for errors that can occur when merging Azure DevOps Pull Requests
Azure DevOps Server: Added support for authenticating with Personal Access Tokens

Fixed:

Check Out Pull Request: The Check Out Pull Request button is now validated again if the HEAD branch changes
Check Out Pull Request: The Check Out Pull Request button is now disabled if the remote branch is not available
Pull Requests: Creating pull requests now works as expected for forks on Bitbucket
Pull Requests: In some cases, a newly created Pull Request was displayed in the list if it was created for another repository

Join over 500,000 subscribers.

Subscribe for our newsletter with best Mac offers from MacUpdate.

55 Reviews of Tower

I've used Tower since 2011, seen it grow, mature and it no doubt implements quite an intuitive UI on top of git. However, unless you're really using every single feature on a daily bases, the price tag is just to hefty in the light of the countless alternatives. To add just two more to the list: Both git support in Atom as well as the Fork git client (both free) are under constant development and falls short in less and less situations. Nonetheless, I would have stayed with Tower if they hadn't switched to subscription and I might switch back should they decide to drop it again. So only one star – not for poor implementation but for the pricey subscription model.

(3)

Tower is arguably still the most mature GUI git client out there: it has a vast array of features, super stable, excellent documentation, and presented in an UI that has been copied by many. I would give it 5 stars, but unfortunately, the subscription business model the company chose to adopt is universally hated - and it is extremely pricey. At $70/year for an individual developer, or $100/user/year if you work in a team, they are severely limiting their user-base. Tower is a solid tool, and most regular users wouldn't mind paying these prices for a lifetime license - or might even be willing to put up with a subscription model, if the pricing was about a quarter of what it is now. But at these prices, people will be constantly looking for 'something better' - and now, with tools like Fork, GitFinder and Sublime Merge, there are a growing number of options. Loose 1 star for subscription model, another star for being overpriced.

(0)

(3)

Detlevski

18 July 2019

Version: 3.4.2

After 1 year on subscription model for the reduced price cancelled my subscription. There are plenty of free alternatives, I am quite happy using SourceTree for my BitBucket repos. Besides that I'm totally done with most forms of subscriptions. There are two things one can do:

1. Rant on every app/site that wants to trap you (and your wallet) into the subscription model, but still continue your subscription.

2. Cancel your subscription or unless you really, really need the service don't add any new subscriptions.

(3)

$99 a year to push PRs to my self-hosted git repo when there are capable alternatives for free? $70 for version 2 was already at the upper end for this type of software and I happily paid it. I'm using version 2.6.6 still and it works fine. $99 a year for version 3 is not something I can justify to my employer when my co-workers are using SourceTree or VSCode for free.

(3)

As a long timer customer of Tower 2 im sorry to say that Tower 3 is not worth a penny as i REALLY HATE subscription based models. Will never again buy anything from this company. And you can use git for free and there are already better alternatives out there with nice GUIs.

(4)

Simply and truly the best Git client out there. The new features are absolutely awesome: Pull Requests lets me create and manage my GitHub PRs right from the desktop; and I can finally use Interactive Rebase without breaking my head, just using drag and drop. Love the app!

(1)

Long time user since V1. The new pricing model in V3 is insane so I will stay with v2. I use IntelliJ more than Tower, and it cost the same price as Tower. Once you stop paying the annual fee, you fall back to last version though. It seems this is a decision from a bunch of stupid sales.

(4)

Just… no. I used this app when it was in 2.x, and I must say I liked it quite a bit. Mostly the UI, I guess. The functionality and under-the-hood conditions were less enjoyable, and the dev would prioritize whatever sold copies (at least on paper?…), rather than fixing core issues with app's performance. Version 3 was a chance to remedy a lot of such things, but instead, after I'd say pretty short beta period (and I believe just 2-3 beta releases before final) - the app was released, and now it's subscription (liked the release notes pretty much saying - "well, you guys probably expected that, right?"). And the core performance issues still not fixed. And there's STILL not ETA (the tickets for that were up for 2 years). So I thought… well, I just vote with my wallet and NOT support this dev anymore. That said, in a quest for a replacement, I found a really nice app which is mentioned below - called Fork. The UI is a bit less polished, but it still is good in its own way. The app is very performant (no need to wait for seconds OR MINUTES for Tower to update my larger repos status), is very easy to use and seems to be made by someone who actually knows how write good software that's good not only on the surface and it pretty much is all I need. What's more, it's free. But I'd happily pay. Not subscription happily, but a good "standard" dev tools price. Bad move, fournova…

(5)

Good app, not perfect but good. I was thinking to buy a license for version 3 after being a beta tester. I saw the price and the subscription model. I nope out the here. Sorry, it's just a total deal breaker.

PS/ I recommend to all of you to check "fork". It looks really good and it's free for now.

(6)

Like everyone else I loved this app but, with subscription and the cost of said subscription, will be moving to something else.

(7)

1/2 star for Subscription model. The nerve! I'll recommend the video course for GIT, since they got me to understand and love the technology, but that's that. For a GUI, look elsewhere.

(6)

LuxLogica

08 July 2018

Version: 3.0.1

Have used and loved Tower for many years - and also beta tested version 3. Like many of the reviewers here, I also feel somewhat betrayed by the change in business model: subscription-ware is my pet hate, and I, too, will be abandoning Tower.

(4)

How much!?!?! Ha-ha-ha-ha....! I really hate subscriptions anyway but that's just taking the mick. T*ssers. Ok, time to get better and quicker at the Terminal. It's only a GUI after all.

(6)

Kris-nx

03 July 2018

Version: 3.0.1

Sad to see another good app go subscription. I moved to Tower as a replacement for GitBox -- which I'm fairly sure has been abandoned, but still working. I'll use Tower 2 until it no longer works as I have no interest in subscribing. Besides, I find myself using the command line more than half the time. Tower along with other GIT GUI's are just a nice way of keeping things organized.

(5)

Show comment (1)

I used to love Tower, I even beta tested v3. When the mail arrived that v3 was released I took my creditcard, ready to pay. Until I read Tower became subscription based. Ridiculous. I hate subscription models. Besides, Tower has become ridiculously expensive. So, I am out. No sale. I keep using v2 or move to other software altogether. Had they kept an identical licensing model, I would still be using Tower. What a pity.

(18)

R1000m

28 June 2018

Version: 3.0.1

I loved this software. And charging an upgrade fee would be OK after all this time. But I don't think they have priced their subscription reasonably at all. Can you say crazy expensive? Also, I hate subscriptions. Luckily, there are a few alternatives now (perhaps not as good as Tower 2?), and Tower 2 is pretty solid and not going to stop working immediately. I hope they stay in business, but they'll have to do so without me.

(7)

Show comment (1)

Moxiesozo

27 June 2018

Version: 2.6.6

Version 3.0.1 has been released. Now subscription-based.

(1)

Show comment (1)

Excellent, feature-full git client, with a polished interface. But what is really the icing on the cake here is the extensive high-quality online manual and video series which the company makes available free for all using their app: it teaches all about git, as well as Tower, and is invaluable for newbies and regular users alike.

(2)

I was using SourceTree for the longest time and the CL. I grew disenchanted with SourceTree and started checking out some different clients. Gitup was definitely a consideration, but the default font is way too small for my eyes. I ended up buying Tower because I like the clean, native UI. My main gripe is that the font size cannot be changed. This is a major usability issue. Luckily the default font size is a bit bigger than Gitup, but I would love to see font sizing added. It's a very basic accessibility issue for many users to have decent sized fonts.

(1)

A nice tool, but developers seem to prioritize larger features above smaller quality of life improvements. Working on rather large codebases (in terms of both number of files, file sizes, and any combination of these), I find visual feedback lacking when Tower/git work behind the scenes. There's nearly ZERO indication that something's happening at all (files being scanned for changes, staged, committed). Contacted devs, was basically told that I'm not a normal/average kind of user (yeah, right) and most of the users work on much smaller codebases (well duh… too bad the kind of web dev I do is media rich and build systems are complicated and require lots of files/libs). Understandable, but things like "in-progress" indication for potentially long operation is 101 of UI/UX and it completely escapes me how devs live with such a non-polished approach to their own otherwise pretty nice UI. Second time (after several months from original request) I tried to remind them the problem still persists they didn't even respond. Not cool. Let's do the right thing and make it 5 stars, guys.

(1)

Show comments (2)

Improvements have been steady and good, Tower is an excellent git client. Sourcetree has gotten worse, and Tower has gotten better. In daily use, in fact, permanently open.

(0)

r-owen

14 September 2016

Version: 2.5.0

I encourage you to try both Tower and SourceTree before making a decision. I am glad there is competition, but every time I check out Tower I go back to SourceTree. I primarily use a git GUI to view history, and for that I personally find SourceTree much more pleasant. Here are some reasons: - In SourceTree's history view I can launch an external diff of a single file. Tower does not support that, much to my surprise. In both cases the in-app diff usually suffices, but occasionally I want a better diff for one or two files (not all at once, the way Tower does). - When I click on a node of the graph in SourceTree I immediately see the diffs. Tower makes me open disclosure triangles or click "Expand All" every time. - SourceTree's history graph shows all branch names associated with each node; Tower's does not, unless you use the larger commit size and make the graph panel very wide so the names are not truncated to "...". This is fairly minor, and I suspect one can get used to either. - When I view the git log of a file in SourceTree it shows me the commits I expect to see, whereas Tower includes commits I don't recognize. I'm not sure what is going on there, but suspect I'm seeing some commits I squashed away. If so, being able to see squashed commits sounds useful, but I don't want it on by default. Oddly enough, neither one seems to have good support for interactive rebase. I'd like to be able to select a range of commits to start an interactive rebase, and as far as I can see neither one does this properly. SourceTree shows me just two of the commits. Tower doesn't support interactive rebase at all. The command line is fine except I hate having to count the # of commits. You should try both out and decide for yourself. I appreciate that Tower gets regular updates, and $80 seems a fair price for a well written and well maintained git GUI. However, I strongly prefer the UI in SourceTree for viewing history, and use the command line for everything else.

(0)

Show comment (1)

I really love this app. It cleans up and simplifies my workflow so much. If $59 seems like a lot, give it a little time and I guarantee you'll see it's easily worth that.

(0)

This is such a good app. Clean UI, fast and reliable, very responsive developers. Much much easier to use than source tree. Saves me a lot of time. 59 bucks is quite a bargain for this tool. Great work guys, thanks.

(0)

Have been using this app for about 2 years now; I could not be without it. The features in 2.x, in particular, git-flow support, make for a great upgrade. Had someone told me that this would make use of git intuitive, I would have, frankly, laughed at them, but it definitely meets that bar.

(2)

Xplicit

12 August 2014

Version: 2.0.1

v2.0.3 is out

(0)

I am a user from (appr.) day one. I have always been a big fan of Tower although I did not like all decisions made by the developers. With version 2 I am really really happy. Not much to wish for anymore :)

(0)

I like the latest 2.0 version. The UI / UX has significant improvement. It also allows you to manage your github,bitbucket and beanstalk accounts easily

(0)

I bought Tower back in Aug. 2012. So after a little over a year with it, here's my take: Tower sets itself above the rest by making Git more accessible to mere mortals without abstracting away Git's powerful features. # For new users: Tower helps take some of the edge off Git's steep learning curve by providing a clean GUI that faithfully represents what Git is actually doing under-the-hood. So as you use Tower, you learn Git. # For more advanced users: If you're already proficient in Git, you're probably looking for a tool that helps you efficiently navigate a source tree and its history. Having used GitX, Github for Mac, and SourceTree, I'd say Tower provides the best "situational awareness" while digging through a repo. It also takes some of the pain out of dealing with submodules. # Criticism The only UX quirks I've come across are: - Branching off of HEAD could be a little easier (e.g. a button in the title bar). - It'd be nice to have a character count on the commit message title for those of us who try to keep it under 50 characters. Fournova seems very responsive to user feedback, so I'll send those in as feature requests. # Verdict Even with all the great free Git GUIs out there, getting Tower was worth it. It's just that good.

(4)

Tower is my favorite git client for the Mac, aside from the command line. It's still not perfect, but has replaced the need for GitHub for my development team- everything we need is supplied by Tower, replacing some of the nice features GitHub offered. (Tower is by no means a replacement for GitHub, it just happened to cover our needs.)

(0)

Pretty decent. I find it does not work very well on large repositories though as it becomes unresponsive. To be fair, I have not found an alternative that does work really well on large repositories.

(3)

Show comment (1)

A good app, but average. I personally bought four licences for my staff and we use it frequently. But, it lacks features. And parts of the UI are ambiguous and the repository management is non-existent. Once you have a lot of repos to manage, it's a mess. And it's far from stable, there are lockup and crashes and stalls that plague it from time to time. The company are very responsive, to be fair, but in light of the FREE SourceTree which supports git-flow, and Mercurial, and really exposes the advanced features of Git, it's a no brainer. Use SourceTree. Tower is good, but they REALLY need to boost it past SourceTree to make it worth buying.

(5)

Show comment (1)

evilinstone

01 August 2012

Version: 1.4.10

What about app in Mac App Store?

(1)

Show comment (1)

Just compiled it for my G5. Runs unexpectedly good, except that Preferences don't open. If you want to do so too: - Compile git from source - Place it in Tower.app/Contents/Resources/git I don't understand why they don't offer PowerPC support out of the box, to be honest.

(1)

Show comments (3)

This is definitely the best git frontend. Switching repositories quickly, creating new or cloning remote ones all that is no hassle anymore. And there are many more features. The interface is quite good, sometimes it could be a bit more intuitive though. Ok, Tower is a little pricey but since it saves so much time it's well worth it.

(1)

Wonderful app - good interface, stable, and feature-full. I have to agree with the other posters, however, that the pricing makes it a deal breaker for me. Compare with GitBox (currently $20), and SourceTree (currently FREE), and the $60 tag seems to be out-of-touch with the market.

(4)

With 1.2.0, nice colourful toolbar icons have changed to ugly Grey ones :(

(2)

Show comment (1)

A very nice piece of software! Makes git easy to me... A bit expensive but it's okay for this.

(1)

Show comments (2)

Tower is a well-designed product with excellent usability and a very attractive interface. It's easy to set up projects, clone them, do all the usual stuff, but it offers nothing over the command line, especially for the rather high price. I can't see a way for any developers to justify these prices unless they start adding features that actually improve and aid the workflow. A good start would be to, say, add git-flow support. Money aside, this is a fine program and the developers were quite responsive during the beta. I am reverting, however, to SmartGit.

(2)

Show comment (1)

I use Tower to manage a world-wide group of developers. It makes it easy to check what was done by each person on a daily basis. Great UI and easy for new developers to use.

(2)

Veryvito

24 February 2011

Version: 1.0.3

Crazy good support from the developer! Open to suggestions and quick to act. Thanks!

(2)

Being reasonably new to GIT and having tried a few tools each time resorting back to the terminal, I have to say Tower really impresses me.

(0)

fonginator

19 December 2010

Version: 0.9.39

Been playing with Tower for a bit and I generally like it, although I do find it slower than GitX for basic usage. The main problem I have, though, is that pricing for the final product remains unannounced and the developer hasn't indicated (AFAIK) whether beta testers will be given discounts on the final product's cost. While others may be OK beta testing an upcoming commercial product at their own time and expense, I'd prefer to see some reciprocity in the form of free or discounted registrations.

(4)

Show comments (2)