Absolutely, we're more concerned w/ use-cases vs. Docker itself. PhantomJS is a great tool, and we're using it to show off the platform which hosts this sort of stuff in the cloud (with Docker!). Would love to get some more feedback: leo@stackhut.com :)
Hey Stephen -- Honestly, it was just what I had more experience using; I always presumed Phantom is more consistent and malleable, albeit sometimes a pain to configure. You are definitely right on the simplicity aspect.
We're aiming to extend it past basic screenshotting -- is there any functionality you'd like to see? (moreover, are there any other services we could chuck on the platform that you'd like to see?)
Personally? No. I specifically don't use hosted services wherever I can self-host. My interest was purely technical, rather than about a specific use-case I had in mind.
Hey Duboff! Sorry to hear that -- what website were you trying to screenshot? Would love to try and fix your issue: you can reach me at leo@stackhut.com .
8 comments
[ 4.2 ms ] story [ 45.3 ms ] threadSurely docker is just a deployment strategy?
I've used phantom (via Casper) for some scraping tools but for images I would have thought the wkhtmlto* project was simpler?
We're aiming to extend it past basic screenshotting -- is there any functionality you'd like to see? (moreover, are there any other services we could chuck on the platform that you'd like to see?)
Link to GH issues here, too: https://github.com/StackHut/phantomjs/issues