fp.

Ah, cool idea. I’m currently integrating image processing features—crop, compress, and meme generation. Once that’s almost done, we can move on to integrating the workflow.

TZubiri•42m ago

Feels like infringing on the ILovePDF trademark. (Backpiggying on an established brand to make it look like you are affiliated, or the actual brand)

pratik227•39m ago

Ah, I’m not sure. I’m not directly using their name, and it’s not related, right? It shouldn’t cause any issues, correct?

franze•17m ago

well you clearly state that your naming is based on their naming with this sentence "The Privacy-First Alternative to"

even if it might not stand before court it is enough for a lawyer to write you a letter that is not 100% baseless.

pratik227•9m ago

I see

Antibabelic•41m ago

Doesn't a time-tested solution already exist in the form of PDF24?

pratik227•36m ago

It's not just PDF i'm also working on image processing and all as well

zdc1•20m ago

Nice to have something that doesn't require Windows

burgerone•40m ago

How does it compare to stirling pdf?

pratik227•37m ago

I’m doing everything locally, with no pricing on the extension for now. I do plan to make it paid later, but since all processing happens locally, your files never leave your device and remain completely safe.

also not just PDF the image processing also WIP will be done by next week

TZubiri•39m ago

Might be better to provide a downloadable executable instead of asking the user to trust that the browser isn't doing what the browser was designed to do.

pratik227•37m ago

I plan to build a Chrome extension and am considering making it paid, around $2 for lifetime access. Also Desktop app is also good idea

sabdarmdhn•33m ago

Make the Desktop Version natively, even tho its time efficient to make it just Electron

pratik227•30m ago

yah noted I will do

niemandhier•18m ago

Extensions have the downside that a malicious actor can buy out the original dev and start using them as an intrusion point.

wickedsight•11m ago

I can easily check network monitor in the browser to see exactly what a web app is doing.

Running an executable is a risk by default and the way it interacts with my network is way less transparent. I honestly prefer this in the browser.

matsemann•5m ago

Disagree, no way I'm downloading an executable from something unknown to modify a pdf.

Bewelge•25m ago

Great job! If it's all on client you should make a PWA out of it so it can be installed and used offline.

Built a client only webapp myself and offline usage is the main thing users ask about.

pratik227•23m ago

Yeah, I’ll do that. I have a Chrome extension that I’m planning to make paid, and I may also release a desktop version. I’m thinking of pricing it cheaply—around $2 for lifetime access

gregsadetsky•20m ago

Great work, thanks for sharing and congrats on the launch!

Very very small note - many clickable things on your site (the "explore" and "new task" buttons, the directory and blog links at the top, etc.) don't change the cursor to the css "cursor:pointer" (ie the clicky hand)

You might want to add `cursor-pointer` to your tailwind <button> elements

pratik227•18m ago

Noted I will fix it

throwaway290•16m ago

makes it difficult to verify that it runs locally. unobfuscated source is not available. important actions, like open a PDF, save edited PDF, will be stuck or error if you cut the internet after opening the site and only unstuck after you reenable internet. I get it's probably for speed

anyway, if you save the page in Chrome and serve it on a local server, it works even with internet disabled, so there's that.

pratik227•6m ago

Thanks for pointing this out. You’re right - some assets are currently loaded at runtime, which can cause actions to hang if the internet is cut mid-session. All PDF processing itself happens locally in the browser, and as you noticed, serving the page locally works fully offline. Improving offline behavior and making this easier to verify is on the roadmap

Bigpet•15m ago

Was this done heavily LLM assisted? Especially the PDF Edit tools have user-interaction quirks and bugs that a human developer would catch immediately during the regular manual testing when developing.

I'd suggest you at least try and mitigate that by having the LLM do extensive e2e testing if you aren't interested in using your own product.

pratik227•12m ago

It’s still a work in progress. I used an LLM to speed up development, and I’ve done the testing, but I’ll keep improving it no doubt

vunderba•14m ago

Seems like Clientside PDF editors are the new "hello world" app these days. From the last couple months on Show HN alone:

Show HN: PDF Quick – Free PDF tools with 100% client-side processing

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46094734

Show HN: A privacy-first, client-side toolbox (PDF, Imgs, Dev) no server uploads

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46018221

Show HN: FileZen – Client-side PDF and Video tools using WebAssembly

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46339833

Show HN: JW Tool Box – Free, privacy-first web tools (PDF, Image, Converters)

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46065448

Show HN: PDFClear – Browser-based PDF tools with local AI (WASM+Transformers.js)

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46036944

Show HN: Free PDF tools that run in the browser

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46315672

Show HN: Client-side file tools – PDF, images, crypto, all in-browser

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46209627

pratik227•11m ago

During my college days, I used iLovePDF a lot, so I wanted to build an alternative to it. It’s not just about PDFs - I also have work in progress around image processing and related tools and Chrome Extetion as well

MoD411•6m ago

what library are you using on the client side to convert from pdf to word?