
Uppy: let’s teach an old dog some new tricks - kvz
http://uppy.io/blog/2016/07/uppy-begins/
======
amelius
On one of my sites, I'm using websockets to do uploads. This is because it
gives me better control over congestion issues (I can for instance do
bandwidth shaping for each of my virtual connections).

However, sadly, I've discovered that in Chrome when a tab does not have focus,
upload speeds dramatically go down, probably because of some scheduling policy
in the browser.

If you want to _programmatically_ address uploads (i.e., not with a simple PUT
request), you have to somehow face this issue. I'm not sure if Uppy has this
same problem or not (or if it even allows bandwidth shaping).

~~~
elmin
In general, Chrome fires setTimeout and setInterval slower when a tab isn't
focused. Could it be that?

------
andrewvijay
I was actually expecting a dog getting taught something. But rather I got
excited like a dog when I read resumable uploads.

~~~
Avshalom
I was hoping Updog had got a new round of funding and had pivoted.

~~~
kiloreux
What's updog ?

~~~
scottmcf
Not much, how 'bout you?

------
lis
Last discussion about tus:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10591348](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10591348)

Great to see progress. Even though I would prefer if resumable uploads were
part of the browser.

------
onassar
We tested a few commercial options out there (Filepicker most recently), but
the issue consistently ended up being that uploading is such an important part
of our app, that if it's down even for 20-30 minutes a month (which they all
were), it's a big headache, and results in cancelled accounts.

We ended up plugging in the AWS JavaScrpt S3 SDK. We trust their uptime much
more, and browser support is pretty widespread. It came with it's own
headaches (namely, client side clocks being out of sync, and AWS rejecting
uploads due to some security checks), but once we got everything figured out,
it became incredibly stable.

It works by uploading files directly to your S3 bucket. Setup wasn't seamless
(notably, setting things up with AWS Incognito), but in the end, we're
incredibly happy we went this way.

We still use 3rd parties for resize images that are uploaded (namely,
Cloudinary, which has been fantastic), but decoupling the upload logic from
the usage logic has helped tremendously, and affords us reliability in that we
control where the file is stored, how it's name, and are not tethered to a 3rd
party (other than AWS).

~~~
rnicholus
You can just use Fine Uploader, which is an MIT licensed-library that handles
direct-to-s3 uploads from the browser, with support for v2/v4 signatures,
chunking, pause/resume uploads, image scaling/previews, drag and drop, folder
uploads, etc, etc. [http://fineuploader.com/](http://fineuploader.com/)

