3 ms·
Why do such things need to be hosted at all? I've got a few file converter apps on my laptop. They're faster and better and you don't need to stream the data o
by api 1y ago
Why do such things need to be hosted at all?
I've got a few file converter apps on my laptop. They're faster and better and you don't need to stream the data off somewhere just to process and stream back, which is silly.
- liotier 1y agoA relevant audience are the corporate computing inmates, who cannot install anything locally... They are happy to find utilities wrapped behind some web front.
- api 1y agoAhh good point. An often missed driver for the cloud-ification of everything is that it offers a way to escape corporate IT. Sending a 20mb file 2000 miles away to do something trivial to it and send it back is easier than getting permission to install an app.
- PeterStuer 1y agoIt doesn't send the file though.
- maccard 1y agoIt really is. At a previous job, the approval process for a tool involved a questionnaire that rivalled a census, and a wait time of 4-6 weeks for approval. I literally never had any software refused via this process - most people just didn’t bother filling it in.
- Trufa 1y agoWhat a silly take. > Why do such things need to be hosted at all? because: corporate computing inmates, who cannot install anything locally Basically, denying or not seeing the practicality factor of web hosted solutions is either trying to be edgy or worryingly myopic.
- liotier 1y ago> Basically, denying or not seeing the practicality factor of web hosted solutions is either trying to be edgy or worryingly myopic Are you unsatisfied with the myriad of Imagemagick, FFMPEG, sox or Ghostscript GUI front-ends ? What does a web deployment offer ? Even not taking privacy concerns in consideration, the local solution if better - I guess a one-off conversion might wish to eschew local installation, but such bread-and-butter operations are rarely one-off. Or should we consider the market for a zip/7zip/rar/tar.gz file compression web front-end ?
- Trufa 1y agoI don't understand what we're discussing. Am I supposed to defend the usefulness of the internet?
- graemep 1y agoThere are already lots of online convertors. This is FOSS and a bit more trustworthy but very few people in corporate environments will care about that
- doubled112 1y agoThis isn't true for me. My most powerful machine tends to be the home server, and some of my laptops are terrible.
- palmy 1y agoThe reality is also that not everyone isn't technical enough to deal with `ffmpeg` directly. At some point I basically hosted hacked-together website which simply used `ffmpeg` under the hood so that my dad, who's not as technically literate, could easily convert his files. Now I don't have to do this anymore because I can just host a vert.sh instance:)
- XorNot 1y agoI run a selection of things like this on my home network for my wife to use. It's handy to have their just be tools living on the network to use, particularly if you're setting up a new machine or using a work laptop off the guest network or the like.
- barbs 1y agoThe conversion for this one happens all client-side - no streaming data to a server required. If you're happy using your existing apps, you probably wouldn't see much use in this. But I can definitely see how the UI/UX would appeal to a lot of people.
- imoreno 1y agoProbably harder to monetize traffic and upsell subscription extras. I agree, if it's all done on the client anyway, it should just be a local app.