Open-Source Screen Recorders Compared: Cap vs Screenize vs ScreenKite

Cap is built with Tauri (Rust shell + SolidStart frontend), which gives it cross-platform reach but adds complexity compared to native macOS solutions. The result is a tool that's feature-rich on paper but still maturing in day-to-day reliability.

Best for: Teams that want a self-hosted, open-source Loom replacement and can tolerate occasional rough edges.

Screenize — the timeline editor

Screenize is a native Swift app that takes a two-pass approach: first capture raw video with mouse and click metadata, then apply zoom, cursor effects, and backgrounds in a timeline-based editor.

What Screenize does well:

• Auto-generated zoom keyframes by analyzing mouse movements and UI elements
• Keystroke overlays that display keyboard shortcuts during recordings
• Click effects with configurable color-coded ripple animations
• Multi-track timeline with easing curves for fine-tuning
• Advanced export support including ProRes 422, ProRes 4444 (with alpha), HEVC, and H.264
• Fully native Swift implementation (96% Swift)

Where Screenize falls short:

Screenize is very early-stage software with only 6 releases:

• No system audio recording — it's listed as a "planned feature," meaning you can't capture app sounds today
• Not notarized by Apple — macOS will block the app on first launch, requiring manual security bypass
• A security concern: keystrokes (including passwords) are stored in plaintext (GitHub #13)
• Cursor Y-axis inversion bug between the screen and the editor control panel (GitHub #21)
• Basic editor UX is still being fleshed out — standard shortcuts like spacebar for play/pause are feature requests, not shipped functionality
• Solo developer project with limited community traction

Best for: Technical users who want a free Screen Studio–style timeline editor and are comfortable with pre-release software.

ScreenKite — the native speed advantage

ScreenKite is built entirely on Apple's native frameworks, including ScreenCaptureKit and Metal. Its bet is straightforward: by staying native and local, recording and export can be dramatically faster.

What ScreenKite does well:

• Up to 5× faster exports than Screen Studio, thanks to native hardware acceleration
• Auto-zoom that follows clicks and keystrokes during recording — no manual keyframing required
• Built-in editor with trimming, cropping, zoom effects, speed adjustments, and transitions
• Camera overlay with customizable positioning and sizing
• Background customization with colors, gradients, and wallpapers
• Privacy-first: everything is processed locally, no data leaves your device
• Apple Silicon–optimized for minimal resource usage

Where ScreenKite falls short:

• macOS only — no Windows or Linux support
• Currently in public beta, so some features are still being refined
• No cloud sharing — recordings stay local (which is by design, but limits async team workflows)
• Proprietary license, though free to use during the beta period

Best for: Mac users who want the fastest path from recording to polished video, without leaving the app or uploading anything.

Feature comparison

The bigger picture

These three tools represent different philosophies:

• Cap wants to replace Loom — cloud-first, team-focused, cross-platform. But that scope means more surface area for bugs, and the desktop experience can feel inconsistent.
• Screenize wants to replicate Screen Studio's editor in an open-source package. The two-pass approach and timeline editing are impressive for an early project, but without system audio and with known security concerns, it's not production-ready.
• ScreenKite bets on native performance and simplicity. Record, edit, export — all offline, all fast. The trade-off is that you stay on Mac and you share files manually.

None of these tools is perfect. But they're all worth watching, and together they're making professional screen recording more accessible than ever.