[rq1]

I’ll try to not be dismissive of the labour, though it’s kind of funny (or actually natural) that the heavy lifting libraries that only a few can actually write are open and free, while the shallow wrappers that everyone can write are paid and closed.

Decades ago we were calling out these software and now it’s the norm.

Another example along the line: I wanted to extract a frame from a video on iOS, it’s impossible with the built-in tools (screenshot aside) and found that someone built a paid app only for that.

I tell you where we’re heading, we’re screwed.

[lagrange77]

While i'm with you in principle, over the years i've learned that we should not talk down good UI/UX, if that's what the wrapper adds. It's a crucial component to the value of a piece of software for the end user.

[ChrisMarshallNY]

This is true.

I have seen absolutely miraculous backends, totally pooched, because the library developer thought that GUI was for "wusses."

[bennythomsson]

He actually himself writes that he doesn't want to spend too much time on his apps:

> now i have lession that i shouldnt build apps that consumes so much time.

Sounds like somebody really devoted to the perfect UI experience.

Look, I don't want to talk down this kid. Everybody starts somewhere and I like the enthusiasm. But him expecting to make $30 off everybody for plumbing together a bunch of FOSS libs is rubbing me the wrong way.

[RamblingCTO]

Distribution, marketing and running it is the hard part, not building software. I consider libraries to be like roads, it's a communal good if you will. Feel free to build and run these apps yourself in the open instead of complaining. You will see how time consuming that is.

[bennythomsson]

Building a road is usually very similar to building another road.

Building ffmpeg is very different from an SSL lib. They need different tradeoffs, design strategies, domain knowledge, etc. And doing them properly is really really hard. A lot of software out there sucks, in part because there is more focus on marketing than on correctness and reliability.

If roads had the same quality as software then traffic deaths would be an order of magnitude higher.

Try working on a library used in tech that your life depends on and you might re-consider your road metaphor.

[BoorishBears]

> Distribution, marketing and running

Case in point: I regularly use a free iOS app that is clearly the result of someone's deep passion in taking what could have been a simple wrapper and turning it into an incredibly simple but powerful interface to complete a useful task efficiently and at any scale... and that task is exactly what OP was trying to do...

https://apps.apple.com/us/app/frame-grab/id1319670797

But as someone who's somewhat familiar with app store optimization, I guarantee the creator did none of that that.

Their app name would need to be something obnoxious like "Frame Grabber Extractor: Pic from Video" to capture all the different searches people do for this task.

And the people focused on distribution are even paying for ads with the money they make their IAP infested "1 week trial; $4 a week" alternatives make.

[monsieurbanana]

What you mention is the hard part is only because the foundational blocks are free and open source (in this example). Not that marketing would become easy, it's still difficult, but not write-ffmpeg-from-scratch difficult.

[pplonski86]

What is more, many people expect that software that they are trying will be open source and free. It makes really hard to create a new desktop app that is paid as a solo founder. Congratulations!

[pdyc]

its not just shallow wrapper, as a creator of other shallow wrapper(online and free btw) if you want to crop a video how do you plan to do it with ffmpeg cli? it would be really tedious to do so. You can easily do it visually with this wrapper and other such wrappers so its not like they are not providing value. Another example is do you remember ffmpeg command syntax? i don't! here he is taking care of generating it for you so you don't waste time asking llm or searching for google and iterating on it if it doesn't works.

[BoorishBears]

It is literally a shallow wrapper!

There's nearly 2 million lines of code in the FFMPEG codebase: unless you're building the next Adobe Premiere, no matter how much value you provide, you are building an extremely shallow wrapper around FFMPEG when you build an interface to crop videos.

No one is saying a shallow wrapper can't provide value, but most of the value for the end user is derived from FFMPEG, not the layer you added to it.

If we took FFMPEG and your wrapper and separated them, FFMPEG could still do the one task that your users need: it would be harder, and it would be less convenient, but it can still crop videos. Your tool would no longer do anything but draw rectangles where we'd like a crop to appear. It'd meet no user needs at all.

-

Also to clarify my stance, there's nothing wrong with shallow wrappers, and I've made shallow wrappers: I know finding the user need, and thinking of the right UX and figuring out distribution is all a lot of real legwork.

But I also find it's important to realize when most of the value you're providing is enabled by something you built on. There shouldn't be shame in admitting that you wrapped something that was powerful and potentially unwieldy for your segment of users and made it useful.

[bennythomsson]

Of course they provide value! They car dealer selling you that new Toyota also provides value. Without him you couldn't buy that car, certainly not so easily.

Doesn't mean he manufactured it, or invented it, or conceived of the very idea of an automobile with an ICE (or EV). It's all a big collaborative effort, and imagining that all of the $40k for that car go straight into the dealer's pocket would be absurd. Legally absurd, and ethically absurd as well.

Similar with a piece of software that builds on other work. Of course it provides value (hopefully). But on the whole, the extra value added is not the majority of the whole package.

[criddell]

I think you are underestimating how difficult making a great UI is (although I haven’t used this application so I can’t say if it’s great or not).

[bennythomsson]

And you might be underestimating the work that went into those libraries.

We are talking decades of work, dealing with platform issues, performance, loads of security considerations and then there is the whole licensing+patent topic.

Sure UI work is hard, but of the whole package, it's only the visible part of the iceberg and now I'm expected to give $30 to the person who only contributed that last piece? Of course it's work too but if not at least half that money is being donated to the underlying FOSS projects then I'm out.

Another suggestion: open source your app. Those who don't know how to compile/build it, or are too lazy, which will be most, they can pay for the convenience, and you'll have the income you expect, but at least you are giving back to the community on whose work you are basing yours.

> self-taught full-stack developer who wrote the first line of code in the 2020 Corona lockdown.

You my friend are standing on the shoulders of giants. Time to ack them.

[lovasoa]

Making a good user interface is definitely not easy. Yet it's orders of magnitude easier than writing ffmpeg.

That said, there is nothing wrong with a paid wrapper around a large and complex open source library. Distributing their work more widely is not a disservice.

[rokhayakebe]

Water is free, but you pay some company because they bottled it. While free, it would have cost most people a ton to go find a source and carry it back. These wrappers are a good thing.

[zulban]

If you're concerned about open and free software I'm not sure using iOS makes a lot of sense. Of all mobile and desktop platforms, iOS has the highest barrier to entry for the free utilities you're hoping to find. Were you surprised you couldn't find your free utility on iOS?

[xnx]

The authors and maintainers of foundational code/utilities like ffmpeg/curl/etc. should definitely be the ones who have all the riches they could ever want. Thousands have made fortunes off of their work.

That said, what's the free and open source version of this tool? There are some great open source video editors like Shotcut, Openshot, KDENLive, Blender, etc., but I think this tool is more like CyberChef for video?

[6SixTy]

>what's the free and open source version of this tool?

PowerToys is Free and Open Source, and has at minimum an image resizer utility. It's a good starting point for adding on richer functionality like a preview GUI, and I'm sure that the basic video and audio manipulation would be appreciated as additions. Also since it's a Microsoft sponsored project, I imagine that the signing process is drastically different than what OP has experienced.

I know that's really not satisfying to say that "someday we could have this in the FOSS space", but everything starts somewhere.

Though editors like Shotcut and KDENLive are considered non linear since you can layer on different effects, while OP's utility is definitely not that.

[buildbuildbuild]

Perhaps the author would consider open sourcing if they received financial compensation for their work to date? Crowdfunding or retroactive grants can liberate code.

Context: a big chunk of my 2024 income was from grant money to build open source software that I may have tried to monetize otherwise. It’s possible.

[nullpilot]

Are there any must-know options for receiving grants?

[anonu]

I think you have a warped perspective. Not everyone has the time or skills to use CLI tools. People will pay to save time. The market is multi faceted and complex and there's a market for everything. In this case you're just not the customer.

[progx]

Then why you not write free open source UIs for the libs?

[Pidaymou]

Simple because he can't and it's easy to throw smug opinions around the internet.

[chasing]

Making a friendly interface that doesn’t require the user to have to install a new tool is a value-add. Maybe the average power-user doesn’t need it, but it doesn’t seem entirely sinister.

[newsclues]

I’m actually really fond of the model: here are the tools you can do anything with them but here is packed bundles that do something and the ecosystem is funded by selling bundles which often are just a UX for the tools and having them preconfigured.

Gives everyone the option of picking free or paid options, depending on people’s needs.

[p4bl0]

Upvoting you because my comment saying the same thing is getting downvotes and I really think the message is important.

However I don't think it's fair to call this a "shallow wrapper". It's clear that a lot of work went into the design of this GUI and, and making user-friendly interfaces is also an important work (that is far too often overlooked in the open sources communities).

Yet the fact that FFmpeg, the tool that does all the heavy background work, isn't even mentioned anywhere on the website, even in the FAQ or the footer is at least a non-negligible ethical problem.

UPDATE: The same goes for ImageMagick that I just saw this app installs and uses too.

[zvr]

I have not downloaded the app, so I don't know what it contains.

The licenses for both ffmpeg and ImageMagick do not require anyone to mention them in the website.

However, if they are being re-distributed, there are clear obligations for providing source code and attributions. Omitting to do so is a violation of the legal obligations.

[bagels]

Ffmpeg is in just about anything that deals with video, almost never with explicit mention anywhere you can find it.

[nipponese]

Consider that someone talented enough to write a library probably has a much higher salary potential than a front-end hacker. Shouldn't the latter be allowed to eat, as undignified as you may find it?

[hombre_fatal]

Well, the “last mile” of value add that makes something useful to end users (esp non-technical ones) is the “last 90%” of the job.

We dismiss these things as wrappers on HN because we like to believe that the technical side is 90% of the work.

But this belief has an easy antidote: ask to see the "UX" (lmao) we built.

[promptdaddy]

The core of your comment is mere jealousy. Why open source a project if it's not to be used.