Show HN: Pdfwithlove – PDF tools that run 100% locally (no uploads, no back end)

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

Functionality and Workflows

  • Users request richer workflows: chain operations (merge → size-check → compress), selective page extraction, and combining operations with/without compression.
  • Current roadmap mentioned: image tools (crop, compress, “meme” generation) plus future workflow support.
  • Some report broken/limited editing: trouble selecting existing elements, deleting drawings, inserting text; Word→PDF conversion quality criticized as “basically useless” for anything nontrivial.

Browser, Local-Only, and Offline Behavior

  • Many value “no-upload, all local” processing, especially for sensitive documents.
  • Others worry that in-browser tools are hard for non-technical users to verify; offline hangs when network is cut mid-session raise doubts, even though saving and serving the page locally works.
  • Suggestions include PWA support, command-line WASI builds, and native desktop apps; disagreement over whether executables are safer than browser apps.

Naming, Branding, and Trust

  • Several see the name and “privacy-first alternative to [well-known site]” tagline as close enough to feel like brand piggybacking or “phishy,” though some doubt a strong legal issue.
  • “With love” branding triggers skepticism in some, who associate it with eventual monetization pivots or “rug pulls.”

Pricing and Business Model

  • Planned Chrome extension and possible desktop app, initially around a $2 one-time fee, draw mixed reactions: some say $2 suggests low quality; others argue typical willingness to pay for PDF tools is $0 given many free options.
  • Broader discussion on sustainable pricing vs subscriptions; some argue users will pay more for polished, native, privacy-respecting apps.

Quality, LLM Use, and Testing

  • The author acknowledges using LLMs to accelerate development.
  • Commenters detect “vibe-coded” UI and UX bugs and argue this is symptomatic of LLM-heavy workflows without enough manual testing.
  • Concerns raised about code provenance if much of the implementation is LLM-derived and the project becomes commercial.

Open Source, Tailwind, and Ecosystem

  • Some expected open source due to a “Source” link; author cites the Tailwind funding debate and lack of sponsorship as reasons not to open the code.
  • This stance is criticized as inconsistent given reliance on LLMs trained on existing open code.
  • Multiple people note a flood of similar client-side PDF tools (and long-standing options like pdftk, Ghostscript, Stirling PDF, PDF24, Mac Preview, LibreOffice), questioning how much new value this project offers.