[HN Gopher] Show HN: Ishim - find available one-word domain names
___________________________________________________________________
Show HN: Ishim - find available one-word domain names
Author : docuru
Score : 81 points
Date : 2021-09-17 10:59 UTC (12 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (ish.im)
(TXT) w3m dump (ish.im)
| ahnick wrote:
| This is cool. Never seen the local application take before. I'd
| be interested to know how people respond to having a dedicated
| app and if they enjoy that UX more than a website.
|
| In a similar vein, but more focused around finding similar
| sounding names or creating a mashup of two words is Mashword
| (https://mashword.com). We're working on improving performance
| and reducing noise in the result set, but if you are patient,
| then even in its current incarnation, it produces some novel
| results.
| lbj wrote:
| As an aside. How do you get design-chops like that?
|
| Can it be learned, or are these people just born with a flair for
| picking styles that work well universally?
| AA-BA-94-2A-56 wrote:
| This website design is baffling on mobile. It is so difficult to
| see what is going on.
| dirtybirdnj wrote:
| Hate to dogpile on this but why the app?
|
| Not trying to hate on you, genuinely curious why you chose this
| route. Sometimes using the tools you are most comfortable with at
| the time is the path to the highest short term productivity.
| docuru wrote:
| If you mean why I choose ElectronJS: I wanted it be cross-
| platform, and ElectronJS was the easiest (partly because I
| already built and been using the main feature).
|
| If you mean why a desktop app: I've been using some web-based
| tools. Somehow, they don't last (ie. namemesh, or
| domainsfortherestofus that @pwdisswordfish8 mention went
| offline for sometimes).
|
| Then I thought having a desktop app would be great. For long
| term, you don't have to worry the site is down.
| phgn wrote:
| Also I assume you do WHOIS queries for availability checks
| right? The protocol doesn't work over HTTP in browsers.
| dkersten wrote:
| If it's javascript-only, then surely it could run in the
| client and be hosted for free on github pages as a static
| site and not have to worry about going down.
| indigodaddy wrote:
| What if the site goes down before you visit/load the site?
| j1elo wrote:
| Mental note (after reading tons of Show HN), if I ever release an
| Electron app, the submission title must be preemptive and include
| the phrase " _I don 't care about your whines, if you want a
| native app you're free to start writing it right now, meanwhile
| this exists at all thanks to Electron, not despite of it_"
| suffix!
| lerela wrote:
| Unimportant but it is a bit misleading coming from a Linux
| browser to only see Download for Windows & Mac call-to-actions. I
| thought it was incompatible before I saw the top right penguin.
| You might wanna use the User-Agent to show a more relevant CTA.
| docuru wrote:
| Thanks, using User-Agent is a good idea. I'm using a site
| builder and don't think it's available yet.
|
| I'll add a proper link to linux
| slig wrote:
| Congrats on shipping and thanks for sharing with us! I'm going to
| try it, as recently the good old "impossibility dot org" (don't
| try that, it's NSFW now) went offline.
| docuru wrote:
| Thank you.
|
| I used it a few times, like it a lot. No wonder, I tried to
| find it but couldn't. Thought I remember the name wrong
| pwdisswordfish8 wrote:
| "TLDs", not "extensions". I wince when I see the latter, similar
| (but not the same) as when people say "backslash" when referring
| to ordinary solidus.
|
| The great domainsfortherestofus.com used to exist, but seems to
| have gone offline in the last couple of months.
| windock wrote:
| I had to double check it. Backslash is called "reverse solidus"
| in unicode https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Backslash
| docuru wrote:
| Thanks, I didn't notice the different between "extensions" vs
| "LTDs". I'll update it
|
| I used namemesh.com sometimes, it's gone offline for some time
| as well
| s3graham wrote:
| ("TLD", not "LTD"; there's a few instances on your front
| page.)
| huhtenberg wrote:
| > _solidus_
|
| Ooooh, very nice. A welcome addition to my anti-personnel
| vocabularly. Let me put it right next to the _tittle_ and
| somewhat more pedestrian _compartmentalization_.
| pwdisswordfish8 wrote:
| The point is not that "backslash" sounds unrefined.
| "Backslash" is fine _when you 're referring to a backslash_
| (reverse solidus). What's not fine is saying backslash when
| you are in fact referring to a plain ol' slash (solidus), as
| in URLs.
|
| People who refer to domain "extensions" share something in
| common with people who misapply the term "backslash". Nerdy
| enough to have heard of (file name) "extensions" and
| "backslashes", not nerdy enough to care whether the term is
| actually appropriate for what they're trying to refer to in
| the present. TLDs are not "extensions".
|
| The occasional domain registrar that refers to them this way
| in marketing copy make me wince the hardest. They don't have
| the excuse of co-opting technically incorrect but extremely
| popular misnomers. It's more like, if anything, they're most
| likely to be the _cause_ of people using the wrong term, if
| ever it were to become a trend.
| Y_Y wrote:
| I share your sentiments entirely. I would like to
| unhelpfully add that some TLDs, like .com, .org, and even
| .rs are also file extensions (at least when considered as
| strings).
| junon wrote:
| Is this another electron app? Why? This is 100% doable in the
| browser and has been done before with other sites. Why do I need
| to spend 300MiB of ram to search for domain names?
|
| Sorry to sound negative, it's just... the electron fad is getting
| really old.
| Sn0wCoder wrote:
| I could be wrong but just firing up a modern web browser is
| going to use more ram than that. Theoretically if you shut down
| the browser and opened the app you would be using less ram?
| Personably would not be worried about ram on a modern device
| and electron apps run on most OS's so a good choice overall.
| [deleted]
| KGNKNGQ wrote:
| I mean, just don't use it?
| junon wrote:
| Mm yes the old "criticism isn't valid unless it's positive"
| approach.
| idkhowtobe wrote:
| No, you're simply not the target market, which is the
| reason why your criticism is discounted. The target market
| appears to be people who want an app that will still work
| if OP decides at some point he no longer wants to
| build/operate the service. They can still fire up the
| electron app. It's a valid choice that you needn't agree
| with.
| junon wrote:
| You can achieve this without electron. My criticism had
| nothing to do with that use-case.
|
| The whole concept of "discounting criticism" based on...
| what, exactly? is preposterous.
| zombieprocess wrote:
| I agree. Why would I download an app for something that can be
| done in a browser?
| mritchie712 wrote:
| also, something you will do a couple times at most a year.
| whymauri wrote:
| There are actually power users in this space who might need
| the tool on a weekly basis. It's niche, but they exist.
| docuru wrote:
| Why not browser? As mention in the other comment, I've been
| using some web-based tools. Somehow, they don't last (ie.
| namemesh, or domainsfortherestofus that @pwdisswordfish8
| mention went offline for sometimes).
|
| Then I thought having a desktop app would be great. For long
| term, you don't have to worry the site is down.
| junon wrote:
| How would you meaningfully use _this_ tool in offline mode?
| docuru wrote:
| Not using it offline, definitely need the internet.
|
| What I meant was, you don't have to worry if the tool
| you're using suddenly disappears.
| indigodaddy wrote:
| I have no idea how people aren't getting this. People, if
| the website that the tool is hosted on is down or gone,
| then you are dead out of water. That's why he made a
| local tool. Get it?
| smoldesu wrote:
| How can you be mad? They offer _Linux_ support for chistsake.
| docuru wrote:
| Hi guys, I developed a tool to check and find domain names and
| have been using it for some time. Now, I put them into an
| application (for MacOS at the moment).
|
| This Domain Tool can help you:
|
| - Find one-word names (support English, Spanish, Dutch, and
| French)
|
| - Bulk check those names with the flexible option with extensions
|
| Available for MacOS, Windows and Linux
|
| Why a desktop app? I used some name suggestion web app and
| someday, they just went offline or disappear.
|
| Hope you find it useful. Feedback and question are welcome
| coretx wrote:
| - How do we know the search results are not hijacked/registered ?
| - How do we know the queries are not sold as a database ? - How
| do we know if and/or what third parties are involved ? - Which
| jurisdiction are we talking about? ( Does GDPR apply? )
| masterof0 wrote:
| I like the idea, and would use the service, as the domain is
| short and memorable. But, this is a low hanging fruit for HN
| critics, the argument of: "is an app so I dont have to worry
| about a website being down" is pretty poor, you can host your
| website assets on Netlify/aws amplify/firebase/.... many more....
| , with close to 99.99 % availability. And also provide an
| electron app for those who prefer to use an app. I wish you luck,
| and I hope we get a site, I like your service.
| docuru wrote:
| Have you use impossibly, domainsfortherestofus, or namemesh?
|
| They're great tools, but all went offline for sometime now.
|
| And that's why I build a desktop app
| masterof0 wrote:
| Yeah, the server hosting their assets went down (probably),
| the same problem you could (I hope not) face serving requests
| from your client, right?
| indigodaddy wrote:
| Not if his requests just go directly to Whois servers
| though, right?
| phgn wrote:
| This may be more of a power user tool, you also wouldn't pay
| $49 for the app right?
|
| What interests you about the app compared to searching directly
| at Namecheap etc?
| dewey wrote:
| To the people complaining about this being an app instead of a
| tool in a browser: This is a Show HN and someone made something
| for free and shared it.
|
| Maybe they just wanted to play around with Electron, they don't
| owe you anything.
| huhtenberg wrote:
| I don't see it's as complaining.
|
| OP's project is literally the reverse of taking a traditional
| desktop software, e.g. a graphic editor, and making it into a
| web app. Here, it's something that naturally belongs to a web
| site, but instead packed up into an installable desktop app.
|
| I'd be really curious to see the rationale behind this.
| docuru wrote:
| As I mentioned in other comments:
|
| I've been using some web-based tools. Somehow, they don't
| last (ie. namemesh, or domainsfortherestofus that
| @pwdisswordfish8 mention went offline for sometimes).
|
| Then I thought having a desktop app would be great. For the
| long term, I don't have to worry the site is down.
| jaywalk wrote:
| This still 100% relies on their servers being up, which is
| no different than a website. So you absolutely still have
| to worry about their servers being down, which makes it
| pointless.
| docuru wrote:
| The whois servers down? It doesn't make sense
| indigodaddy wrote:
| Exactly. The author appears to be telling you (you being
| jaywalk) that the application only requires talking out
| to Whois servers, and does not rely on any
| application/webserver...
|
| You concern as stated does not apply.
| [deleted]
| jb1991 wrote:
| > I'd be really curious to see the rationale behind this.
|
| It's much easier to install spyware via an actual desktop app
| than via a web app.
| docuru wrote:
| Thanks for the kind words!
| indigodaddy wrote:
| IMO the fact that it's a local app vs a webapp is a big plus.
| stragies wrote:
| To me the ultimate key to avoiding superfluous comments like
| the ones you refer to, and resulting ones like yours, would be
| to add a tag into the subject line when presenting Software,
| like [Electron]. That would also be helpful for other
| categories, like [subscription], [ClosedSource], etc..
| donnfelker wrote:
| Well said.
| indigodaddy wrote:
| Before anyone makes another comment about how and why this should
| be a webapp....
|
| The author has answered and stated multiple time here that the
| reason he made this a local app is because if the website that
| the tool is hosted on is down or gone, then you are dead out of
| water.
|
| That's why he made a local tool.
|
| And no, the tool does not still rely on some
| application/webserver. He has stated that it only requires
| reaching out to the Whois servers.
|
| _note_ I used "he" but probably should have used "they" as I
| have no idea on the gender identification of the author. What is
| the proper way to just use "the author" in place of he /she/they?
| ERD0L wrote:
| So why not a website with an opened-sourced git so it can't "go
| offline" ?
|
| Was there any other motivations to go electron, maybe to learn
| idk
| wizzwizz4 wrote:
| Not everyone is aware of things like
| https://www.w3.org/TR/offline-webapps/. Also, if you haven't
| downloaded the source, some hosted git server _somewhere else_
| doesn 't help.
| lerela wrote:
| After a few tests it looks good but it reports some domains as
| registered when they are not (for instance kostikaable.com or
| kostikaition.io are marked registered but do not seem to exist
| when I manually run a Whois). Maybe the tool is running onto some
| rate limiting thresholds?
|
| Also when there are a lot of domains to check you could check
| them in parallel, otherwise it gets quite slow to wait for the
| results (but that might be an inherent limitation of the Whois
| servers).
| docuru wrote:
| I'll look into it. Seems like need a little update for the
| kostikaable.com. Not sure why kostikaition.io showed registered
| on your end.
|
| In general, each LTD can have around 300-1000 queries per day
| (the numbers is not officially listed, just from discussion on
| some forums)
|
| Great advice to check them in parallel. Thanks!
| sillystuff wrote:
| An alternative for researching domain names is to apply for TLD
| zone file access. "Trying to find a one word domain name," is
| unlikely to be an acceptable reason for access, though.
|
| I applied (and received access on my second attempt) about a
| decade ago for .com access. Among other things, I ran a check for
| any words in my spellcheck dictionary that were not already taken
| as .com domains. There is a reason for all the silly spellings in
| domain names today; I don't recall the first words that were
| available, but they were not short nor desirable for a domain
| name. There were also no 3 alphanumeric ascii character domain
| names left, at the time.
|
| I applied through Verisign. But, they are currently directing
| folks to apply via ICAN directly.
|
| https://www.verisign.com/en_US/channel-resources/domain-regi...
|
| https://czds.icann.org/home
| nikkwong wrote:
| That's interesting. What type of reasons are typically accepted
| for getting access? I'm assuming if you are attempting to
| commercialize a domain website or project they may give you
| access?
| sillystuff wrote:
| I do not know what their criteria for acceptance are. My
| first, rejected, request discussed looking into distribution
| of available domains. My second, accepted, request was more
| carefully worded to indicate it was for general research.
|
| The purpose of my request was for a personal research project
| to satisfy curiosity. My initial motivation was that there
| were things that seemed to be true about the distribution of
| available .com domains, and I wanted to see what the reality
| was. And, using NS queries would not scale.
|
| I looked for the shortest English dictionary words available,
| percentage of various length domain names still available
| (alpha only and alphanumeric; with single numeral, two
| numeral digits, etc.), for non-words I looked at the distance
| from the closest English dictionary word, collected the
| patterns of common permutations of dictionary words into
| domain names, I monitored change rate, etc.
|
| I've never "used" the information learned except to be able
| to speak with a little more authority in a single
| conversation where the subject matter came up. But, it was
| interesting to me :)
| phgn wrote:
| Note that DNS zone files don't include all registered domains,
| only ones that have DNS records. Depending on domain extension,
| a significant number of desirable short words are registered
| but not in the zone file, or held by the registry for a higher
| price. Also, you can't get complete zone files for ccTLDs.
|
| This is part of the reason why domain search is often slow even
| on popular sites like GoDaddy or Namecheap. They want to give
| you very accurate results, which takes longer.
|
| Source: I'm fighting this accuracy problem all the time for the
| search at https://domain.garden
| donmcronald wrote:
| Does it include WHOIS info? If so I bet it's impossible to get
| access.
|
| Can you tell me if the info has registration dates? I have a
| use case where I'd love to do some bulk analysis related to
| domain squatting, but I've never been able to find a decent way
| I can make bulk queries against all the services I'd want to
| check.
| sillystuff wrote:
| It is just a zone file, for the TLD, like Bind would use. No
| other information.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-09-17 23:01 UTC)