If something was previously the right tool for the job, then, despite no apparent changes in the behavior of the user, is intentionally broken by the creator of the tool and is no longer suitable - that is absolutely, 100% worth complaining about.
Thank you, that’s my opinion as well. I know developers need to put food on the table, but then they should at least be honest about that. Going into the uBlock Github and trolling people there while claiming you “always supported ad blockers” isn’t the right way and I am not financially supporting developers who act like this.
I am not financially supporting developers who act like this.
You were not financially supporting the developers before either. You admitted that you do frequent batch processing of many images on their infrastructure. If anything, losing you as a user is saving them money.
You admitted that you do frequent batch processing of many images on their infrastructure.
I’m not sure why you keep commenting this as a fact, when it’s literally not true. As I’ve said in another thread, you can open up the site, disconnect your internet and process all of the images just fine. All of that code runs in your own browser.
As I’ve said in another thread, you can open up the site, disconnect your internet and process all of the images just fine. All of that code runs in your own browser.
Then disconnect your internet when ads load. Or save the page if “All of that code runs in your own browser.”
Or save the page if “All of that code runs in your own browser.”
Sir, this is not how the internet works. I thought people on the Fediverse are a bit more technically-versed than the average population.
When I disconnect my internet, I can still crop images, save them to my machine in various formats and use the tools in the left sidebar. Photopea does not use the developers’ server to do these tasks, or otherwise I wouldn’t be able to do them at all, when I go offline.
That doesn’t mean I can just save the whole website locally and run it as is. Mostly, because the developers’ code contains references to online sources or might bug out in certain places if it’s not run on the intended domain, etc.
If I disassembled the obfuscated code and replaced those online references, I’m pretty sure the whole thing would just work. Not being able to save a website locally and just run it as is does not disprove my point that the application does not technically need a server to run. It’s just that the developer coded it that way.
It seems like you either cannot understand the technical aspects of what I’m saying or you believe you had a great “Got him!” moment when you said I was freeloading on the devs’ machine and now you decided to stick with it. Either way, not worth any more of time.
So commercial-grade batch processing of images on other people’s infrastructure and dodging any form of compensation is 100% worth complaining about? OK.
You can’t just save the webpage as HTML and run it (which is what woelkchen doesn’t seem to grasp, even though I tried to explain it to him in another thread). But technically, all of the image processing code for cropping, saving, painting on the image etc. runs locally.
You can see that easily for yourself, just disconnect your internet after opening the site and it continues to work just fine.
That’s why all of the accusations that I’m freeloading and straining the developers’ server from batch-processing images are unfunded.
I fully grasp it, I was just pointing out how insane your claim is that you don’t use their server resources by making an equally insane counter point.
That’s why all of the accusations that I’m freeloading and straining the developers’ server from batch-processing images are unfunded.
You claimed that I was uploading and batch-processing images on the developers’ infrastructure. I tried to tell you it’s not true, because all of those features still work without internet. Load photopea.com, disconnect your internet - tadaa, you can still “upload” images, crop them, save them, draw on them…
I must be a magician if I can connect to the developers’ machine without any connection at all. There is only one person in this thread who cannot understand how basic technology works. And it’s not me.
My point is: Why would I pay a subscription for that “service”? A service that barely uses any resources, except the ~1MB Javascript file and a few image assets that are delivered via the web? A web server hosting a few megabytes of data does not warrant 8€ per month per user. If people believe I am an entitled bitch for thinking that way, they can do so. But it will not change my opinion.
I’m not the one getting nervous at looking at other alternatives.
I am not nervous, I am mildly infuriated. There are other tools and I will learn them.
Use the right tool for the job
imagemagick certainly isn’t the right tool for batch-cropping, unless the cropped area is always in the same place (I need a visual representation before cropping and a commandline tool doesn’t cut it here). But thank you for at least trying to suggest an actual solution instead of patronizing me.
Why would I be not calm? I’m not the one getting nervous at looking at other alternatives.
https://imagemagick.org/script/command-line-processing.php
Use the right tool for the job instead of complaining.
If something was previously the right tool for the job, then, despite no apparent changes in the behavior of the user, is intentionally broken by the creator of the tool and is no longer suitable - that is absolutely, 100% worth complaining about.
IMHO.
Thank you, that’s my opinion as well. I know developers need to put food on the table, but then they should at least be honest about that. Going into the uBlock Github and trolling people there while claiming you “always supported ad blockers” isn’t the right way and I am not financially supporting developers who act like this.
You were not financially supporting the developers before either. You admitted that you do frequent batch processing of many images on their infrastructure. If anything, losing you as a user is saving them money.
I’m not sure why you keep commenting this as a fact, when it’s literally not true. As I’ve said in another thread, you can open up the site, disconnect your internet and process all of the images just fine. All of that code runs in your own browser.
Then disconnect your internet when ads load. Or save the page if “All of that code runs in your own browser.”
Sir, this is not how the internet works. I thought people on the Fediverse are a bit more technically-versed than the average population.
When I disconnect my internet, I can still crop images, save them to my machine in various formats and use the tools in the left sidebar. Photopea does not use the developers’ server to do these tasks, or otherwise I wouldn’t be able to do them at all, when I go offline.
That doesn’t mean I can just save the whole website locally and run it as is. Mostly, because the developers’ code contains references to online sources or might bug out in certain places if it’s not run on the intended domain, etc.
If I disassembled the obfuscated code and replaced those online references, I’m pretty sure the whole thing would just work. Not being able to save a website locally and just run it as is does not disprove my point that the application does not technically need a server to run. It’s just that the developer coded it that way.
It seems like you either cannot understand the technical aspects of what I’m saying or you believe you had a great “Got him!” moment when you said I was freeloading on the devs’ machine and now you decided to stick with it. Either way, not worth any more of time.
Indeed it’s not. That’s why your claim that you can use Photopea without using their resources is BS.
Well, it uses the servers to do something and you refuse any compensation.
Then do and host your own version.
Keep trolling, my man! I’m outta here. :)
So commercial-grade batch processing of images on other people’s infrastructure and dodging any form of compensation is 100% worth complaining about? OK.
Doesn’t photopea run locally?
You can’t just save the webpage as HTML and run it (which is what woelkchen doesn’t seem to grasp, even though I tried to explain it to him in another thread). But technically, all of the image processing code for cropping, saving, painting on the image etc. runs locally.
You can see that easily for yourself, just disconnect your internet after opening the site and it continues to work just fine.
That’s why all of the accusations that I’m freeloading and straining the developers’ server from batch-processing images are unfunded.
*whoosh*
I fully grasp it, I was just pointing out how insane your claim is that you don’t use their server resources by making an equally insane counter point.
Yes, exactly this insane claim.
You claimed that I was uploading and batch-processing images on the developers’ infrastructure. I tried to tell you it’s not true, because all of those features still work without internet. Load photopea.com, disconnect your internet - tadaa, you can still “upload” images, crop them, save them, draw on them…
I must be a magician if I can connect to the developers’ machine without any connection at all. There is only one person in this thread who cannot understand how basic technology works. And it’s not me.
My point is: Why would I pay a subscription for that “service”? A service that barely uses any resources, except the ~1MB Javascript file and a few image assets that are delivered via the web? A web server hosting a few megabytes of data does not warrant 8€ per month per user. If people believe I am an entitled bitch for thinking that way, they can do so. But it will not change my opinion.
“Um, achtually I crop images only locally and loading up Photopea in the first place doesn’t count towards freeloading other people’s work.🤓”
Bro why you being mad cringe try just suggesting things instead of being a dick
I am not nervous, I am mildly infuriated. There are other tools and I will learn them.
imagemagick certainly isn’t the right tool for batch-cropping, unless the cropped area is always in the same place (I need a visual representation before cropping and a commandline tool doesn’t cut it here). But thank you for at least trying to suggest an actual solution instead of patronizing me.
You could try Irfanview. Its not FOSS and its at a cost if this is a commercial thing