Caret vs Shortwave

Caret

Caret's idea is that the AI should come to where you type rather than making you visit a chat window, and one keystroke in any Mac app is about as low-friction as that gets. Storing memory locally is the right default for something this invasive. But the mechanism is continuous screen reading, it demands macOS 26 or newer, and free at launch from a v1 startup is a price that has nowhere to go but up.

Pros

• +Works across dozens of apps rather than inside one editor
• +Single Tab keystroke — no palette, no window switch
• +Memory is stored locally on the Mac and improves with use
• +Free at launch with no card required

Cons

• −macOS 26 or newer only, which excludes most machines today
• −Requires continuous screen-reading permission to function at all
• −Free at launch is not a committed price for a v1 product
• −No API, no team features, no cross-device sync mentioned

Shortwave

Still the most capable AI layer we have seen on top of Gmail, and it is now cheaper to try: a free plan and an $18 individual Pro tier sit below the $30-plus business seats. The value is in asking questions of years of old mail, so people who only triage today's inbox will not get much from the paid tiers.

Pros

• +Free plan and an $18 individual tier make it possible to test the assistant without a business seat
• +AI search answers questions across the mail archive, not just keyword hits
• +Model tier, AI quota and filter count scale clearly from plan to plan
• +Native apps on all major desktop and mobile platforms

Cons

• −Business seats at $30 to $120 a month are expensive next to Gmail's built-in AI
• −Free plan limits search history to 90 days and adds a Shortwave signature to sent mail
• −No annual discount is offered; billing is monthly only

Is Caret cheaper than Shortwave?

Caret is free to use; Shortwave starts at $18/mo.

Does Caret or Shortwave have a free tier?

Both: Caret is free to use, and Shortwave has a free tier.