7 ms·

That’s cool, but can I just have a regular app I can run on my computer with a regular GUI instead of having to “host” another persistently running service with

That’s cool, but can I just have a regular app I can run on my computer with a regular GUI instead of having to “host” another persistently running service with all kinds of dependencies? Something like DevonThink, for example.

rektide 5y ago
It's almost viable as a standalone static backend-less webapp. But even PWAs lack the ability to talk to other endpoints & sites. Reserved for *native" apps, for now. :(
- aaaaaaaaata 5y ago
  What are you referring to, with this? PWA is one of my pet topics, and I am not aware of any such limiting factors, and I'd like to be.
  - rektide 5y ago
    In this case Wallabag appears to use a lot of PHP, so porting it to be a self-contained standalone static page is going to be a bit tricky. But assuming porting the codebase weren't so hard, the real issue is that the web platform- even for PWAs- is cruel & iron-hearted about who can talk to who. Applications are still the only free & open communicators on the planet, and that's just fucked, so blasted wrong. CORS is probably going to block most basic interactions. Wallabag is a basic simple application, something that conceptually could easily run as a standalone static web page. But if that page tries to go fetch("https://www.washingtonpost.com https://www.washingtonpost.com") it'll probably immediately hit some CORS restrictions & die. The web got deeply mishandled when we decided it was unsafe to let sites access each other. There's been a deep freak out, an anti-connectedness that's been ruling us for the past ~2 decades, and few forces have moved the needle the other way. We're all afraid of ads & tracking, the security atmosphere is tight & hot, but it's also isolating & destroying the idea of the web, a cross-connected medium. PWAs have gotten all manner of new great APIs & access, but they still have ridiculously brutal & harsh connectivity constraints that have only gotten higher harsher more brutal year after year. (WebRTC aside, There's not been a single year where the web has gotten better able to interconnect, better able to communicate. The cruelty & hostility barometer has gone up and up and up. People misuse the web for bad, so we'll make the web worse, ad infinitum.
- southerntofu 5y ago
  Why would you want a webapp without a backend? The web was explicitly conceived for "user agents" to interact with "servers" and the web ecosystem has very little benefits (and many downsides) outside of this use-case. If you're looking for cross-platform UI toolkits, you could take a look at Qt (for example) which easily produces static backendless (non-web)apps.
ydlr 5y ago
There is archivebox. https://archivebox.io/ https://archivebox.io/
nerdponx 5y ago
I think the Joplin model is great. The application is just an application, but you can sync your notes using WebDAV.
- tomthe 5y ago
  Agree. I used wallabag for years, but now I just use joplin and its webclipper for the same purpose and it works really well, including the sync over syncthing! The only downside is that Joplin does not save the position where I stopped reading.
mbreese 5y ago
Normally I’d agree with you, but here, the major use-case is saving webpages to read on different devices. I use pocket for saving site to read later, and I don’t think it would work nearly as well if I had to restrict myself to one device. So, for this application, a web app makes a lot of sense.
- dmje 5y ago
  Second that. Common use case is saving stuff from iPad or Android phone and doing the reading later on desktop..
ta988 5y ago
Zotero works ok for single pages.
southerntofu 5y ago
Not saying it's the best solution, but it should be really easy to run as a desktop application since it supports SQLite databases. Just have your script start a local web server serving the app, and start a web browser in app mode (or whatever that's called) on the local URL.

rektide 5y ago

It's almost viable as a standalone static backend-less webapp. But even PWAs lack the ability to talk to other endpoints & sites. Reserved for *native" apps, for now. :(

aaaaaaaaata 5y ago
What are you referring to, with this? PWA is one of my pet topics, and I am not aware of any such limiting factors, and I'd like to be.
- rektide 5y ago
  In this case Wallabag appears to use a lot of PHP, so porting it to be a self-contained standalone static page is going to be a bit tricky. But assuming porting the codebase weren't so hard, the real issue is that the web platform- even for PWAs- is cruel & iron-hearted about who can talk to who. Applications are still the only free & open communicators on the planet, and that's just fucked, so blasted wrong. CORS is probably going to block most basic interactions. Wallabag is a basic simple application, something that conceptually could easily run as a standalone static web page. But if that page tries to go fetch("https://www.washingtonpost.com https://www.washingtonpost.com") it'll probably immediately hit some CORS restrictions & die. The web got deeply mishandled when we decided it was unsafe to let sites access each other. There's been a deep freak out, an anti-connectedness that's been ruling us for the past ~2 decades, and few forces have moved the needle the other way. We're all afraid of ads & tracking, the security atmosphere is tight & hot, but it's also isolating & destroying the idea of the web, a cross-connected medium. PWAs have gotten all manner of new great APIs & access, but they still have ridiculously brutal & harsh connectivity constraints that have only gotten higher harsher more brutal year after year. (WebRTC aside, There's not been a single year where the web has gotten better able to interconnect, better able to communicate. The cruelty & hostility barometer has gone up and up and up. People misuse the web for bad, so we'll make the web worse, ad infinitum.
southerntofu 5y ago
Why would you want a webapp without a backend? The web was explicitly conceived for "user agents" to interact with "servers" and the web ecosystem has very little benefits (and many downsides) outside of this use-case. If you're looking for cross-platform UI toolkits, you could take a look at Qt (for example) which easily produces static backendless (non-web)apps.

ydlr 5y ago

There is archivebox. https://archivebox.io/ https://archivebox.io/

nerdponx 5y ago

I think the Joplin model is great. The application is just an application, but you can sync your notes using WebDAV.

tomthe 5y ago
Agree. I used wallabag for years, but now I just use joplin and its webclipper for the same purpose and it works really well, including the sync over syncthing! The only downside is that Joplin does not save the position where I stopped reading.

mbreese 5y ago

Normally I’d agree with you, but here, the major use-case is saving webpages to read on different devices. I use pocket for saving site to read later, and I don’t think it would work nearly as well if I had to restrict myself to one device. So, for this application, a web app makes a lot of sense.

dmje 5y ago
Second that. Common use case is saving stuff from iPad or Android phone and doing the reading later on desktop..

ta988 5y ago

Zotero works ok for single pages.

southerntofu 5y ago

Not saying it's the best solution, but it should be really easy to run as a desktop application since it supports SQLite databases. Just have your script start a local web server serving the app, and start a web browser in app mode (or whatever that's called) on the local URL.