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.

▲

pmontra 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I disagree on that. I think that the main value of this kind of tools is "no installation required".

There are already free PDF editors that can be downloaded and installed once forever. What I used most is Libreoffice Draw: it imports a PDF, edit it as if it were a file in its own format, export as PDF again. It's not the only choice. Firefox has had a vanilla PDF editor since last year: download a PDF or drag one inside the browser window, edit it, save it. It's enough to add a PNG of my signature and fill out forms.

▲

pratik227 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

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

▲

niemandhier 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

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

▲

cluckindan 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Don’t make either unless you have the resources to support them. Anything paid is also a business process with tax implications.

Local-only web apps are great one-off projects, but extensions and native apps require much more maintenance.

▲

sabdarmdhn 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

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

	▲	pratik227 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		yah noted I will do

▲

matsemann 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

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

▲

wickedsight 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

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.