33 comments

[ 3.0 ms ] story [ 71.5 ms ] thread
Useful for people who want to convert a webpage documentation to a PDF when no there's no download option.

However, you didn't made the PDF engine yourself, and also there's another service alike, so what's the point from your service?

It's a mini-app and not a mini startup!!!

Than - mini-app =) Good review! Thanks!
This is great. I've attempted to make PDFs of the website I run using OS X's print to PDF function, which always screws up the background color, placement of certain boxes, comments, etc., regardless of the browser. Your service actually created PDFs that look just like the original AND are text searchable.

What are your plans for the service?

EDIT: I just noticed something: Advertisements are not preserved -- there's just a blank spot (with the background color of the page) where the ads should be. It's not a problem for me, but may be for others.

Thanks for review! I think about it..
(comment deleted)
Very useful. Could you set it to spider the first X # of pages and put it all into one PDF?
Maybe I will do this in future :)
Great site, Love the idea and super simple interface to figure out.

1 Major problem.. it does not work in Opera.

Opera.. :(
its just the way you are prompting the download. Even IE blocks it. However it still shows the download. Many sites do this same thing just w/e code your using is not the correct way. 1 day you will learn that Opera is better :) Give it time.
You didn't even fix the (known) wkhtmltopdf bug that all the fonts turn into DjVu Sans. What value have you added?
My work's internet firewall just picked up the "side benefit" of your site and blocked it for the following reason:

Your request was denied because of its content categorization: "Proxy Avoidance"

The HTML markup is atrocious and you just seem to be pawning the work off to another existing web service which does exactly the same thing you do (http://pdfmyurl.com/)?

Am I missing something?

I think, my UI is better :)
Your UI is a logo and a URL submission box.

PDFMYURL's UI is a logo, a submission box, a 'bookmarklet', and (optionally) a description of their API.

How is yours better?

I'm afraid that I didn't find it very accurate for my own URL: http://experimentgarden.blogspot.com

The letter spacing in one of the lines was about 10-15 pixels between each letter. Also it messed up the header.

Right now if the webpage is too wide it just cuts off. Is there any way you can resize it to fit?
CutePDF (virtual printer that "prints" to a PDF) is usually one of the first things I install to any computer. In my opinion that is an easier solution then going to a website to print another website.
Is CutePDF any better than PDFCreator? I've been using the latter for years; it does the same thing and works very well.
PDFCreator is a fine piece of software. Hardly anything is better, imo.
I like it - may not be the expert user as others though!
Out of curiosity, how do you plan on monetising this?
I think, I'm not going to monetize it.
The term "startup" has been misused so widely I think it's lost all meaning. An unmonetized webapp is NOT a startup or mini-startup.
I think the only way this can be useful is if you code a bookmarklet. The only thing I normally print as PDF from the web are receipts and confirmations.
Were it not for the nofollows on the links, I'd guess this was a shill just to get a link on a site that would later be turned into an all-ads site, or a PDF affiliate site. There seem to be quite a few PDF software affiliate programs if you Google "PDF affiliate."
--edit--

I didn't realize this service is just repackaging an existing service, so perhaps the following feedback should be directed to the people doing the actual service.

--end edit--

Aside from the point that I'm not sure how this constitutes a startup in any way (taken with a grain of salt; "there's no way a search engine could ever be a startup..."), I think this works pretty well. How are you planning to monetize it if you do in fact intend for it to be a startup?

I like that it actually renders the page with proper CSS3. Most services like this do not support CSS3 (things like CSS rounded corners, etc). I see that it also renders the javascript widgets, so that's another +1.

Also, how do you determine what width to make it? My consultancy's site's width is set to look perfect for widths of 1024px or greater. Below that width, it's not perfect, but usable. I see that this service renders slightly below that width.

What's with this insatiable desire to build PDF converters and video converters these days? Isn't the market sufficiently saturated with both?

It may be that both of these are easy to build solutions for, because they're well-defined and not too technically challenging (given the tools available). But that doesn't mean it's a good idea.