[filleduchaos]

> Web app = Always on. No interruption from power outages or wifi problems

Web apps don't magically produce their own compute, power and networking. They still need to be run on something.

(Web app does not automatically equal SaaS, especially in this case that is explicitly billed as self-hosted.)

[easyas124]

Unless you're self-hosting on the same computer you're using, a web app is, by definition, software as a service. But then, either you're just... running a program, or your self-hosted application lives somewhere else that still requires power and network connectivity.

I promise, everyone, it is very legal and very cool to just write applications that run without TCP roundtrips. I promise.

[filleduchaos]

"Unless you're self-hosting on the same computer you're using, a web app is, by definition, software as a service"

This sentence makes no sense to me. "Self-hosting" and "software as a service" are diametrically opposed things.

[freedomben]

> Unless you're self-hosting on the same computer you're using, a web app is, by definition, software as a service.

This seems extremely arbitrary and seems to assume some implicit definitions that are not common, and in fact are the opposite of what I've heard used.

IME software as a service generally speaking means somebody else is doing all the hosting and you as an end user just point your browser to it or in some cases install a local app (and often you put in your credit card and pay a monthly subscription). Self-hosting means you do all that hosting yourself. I've never seen something marketed as SaaS that expected you to host the server-side yourself, but I'd be happy to hear of an example.

> I promise, everyone, it is very legal and very cool to just write applications that run without TCP roundtrips. I promise.

That's a hell of a strawman against an argument I see nobody making.

[xnx]

Exactly. I want the reliability of professional hosting, the ease of a phone app install, and the ownership/control of open source.