No comment on the actual tech (yet), just pointing out you've got a few different numbers floating around on different pages.
The title here mentions reducing costs by 90%, but on the homepage you list reducing cost by 50% (twice), reducing bandwidth by 99%, and offloading 90% of bandwidth. On the github page it lists reducing costs by 30%
From a first-read perspective those are vastly different numbers (30-99%), for what all sound like the same thing (reducing bandwidth by 99% sounds like it should reduce my costs by 99%).
Might want to be more specific (or pick a single number).
Was finishing it up (and getting really good feedback) just before quarantine started, and now that very few people are leaving their houses, just polishing it up and getting it ready for when everyone is out and about again.
Just a simple (click and go) video monitor for your pets/baby. Click "share" on one phone/laptop/tablet, and you can connect and view it from another. Video doesn't use bandwidth unless you're actively viewing, and doesn't go through our servers unless you require TURN (rarely).
On the homepage, the white text over the large images is very difficult to read. Might want to change the text color, outline, or grab different images?
Great suggestion, I saw a week ago or so here some open-source stuff from trevor.io (I think?) for doing a simple walkthrough gif. Might work on adding something like that.
Was literally going to do a ShowHN later this week for a side-project I've been working on that hits roughly the same use-cases: https://chewcam.com (just finishing up some last minor bugs).
Major difference looks to be broad vs narrow feature scope (haven looks very in-depth, with lots of sensor options, etc), native app vs browser based, and long-running (security camera) vs short-lived sessions (hour or two here or there).
Not sure if its appropriate to tack on-to this thread or if I should make a separate one, but figured its closely enough related that someone interested in Haven might be interested in chewcam as well.
The title here mentions reducing costs by 90%, but on the homepage you list reducing cost by 50% (twice), reducing bandwidth by 99%, and offloading 90% of bandwidth. On the github page it lists reducing costs by 30%
From a first-read perspective those are vastly different numbers (30-99%), for what all sound like the same thing (reducing bandwidth by 99% sounds like it should reduce my costs by 99%).
Might want to be more specific (or pick a single number).