Milldown app converts document folders to RAG-ready Markdown entirely on your Mac

·1 views

A developer has released Milldown, a native macOS app that converts PDFs, Word files, spreadsheets, and other document formats into clean Markdown without uploading files to any external server. The app uses Apple's Vision framework for on-device OCR and is powered by Microsoft's open-source MarkItDown engine bundled locally within the app. Key features include folder mirroring, watch folders, RAG chunk export in Markdown or JSONL format, a command-line interface, and token-usage accounting. Benchmarks published by the developer show web pages require 72–95% fewer tokens than raw HTML, while PDFs use 71–84% fewer tokens than native PDF attachments. Milldown requires an Apple Silicon Mac running macOS 14 Sonoma or later, offers a 14-day free trial, and is priced at $39 for a perpetual single-user licence covering up to three Macs.

Read the full story at DEV Community

This is an AI-generated summary. ShortSingh links to the original source for the complete article.

Discussion (0)

LinkedIn 'Bold' Text Is Actually Unicode Character Substitution, Not Formatting

LinkedIn does not natively support bold, italic, or strikethrough text formatting in its editor. Tools that appear to bold text are actually replacing standard characters with visually similar symbols from the Unicode Mathematical Alphanumeric Symbols block (U+1D400–U+1D7FF), originally designed for math notation. LinkedIn's editor treats these swapped characters as ordinary glyphs, with no awareness that any styling has been applied. This workaround carries real drawbacks: screen readers may mispronounce the characters, LinkedIn's search can fail to match the altered text, and pasting into other applications may produce missing or garbled glyphs. Users should weigh these accessibility and functionality trade-offs before using such formatting in posts or headlines.

0 comments Read more at DEV Community

ProgrammingDEV Community ·

AI Tools Cut Dev Cycle Times but 58% of Projects Still Miss Deadlines in 2026

Despite widespread adoption of AI development tools, more than half of software projects still fail to meet deadlines in 2026, according to the Standish Group. A one-month delay now costs SaaS startups an average of $42,000, making speed a critical business concern. However, 73% of development teams using AI report shorter cycle times, with tools automating up to 42% of repetitive coding and testing tasks. AI-powered code reviewers, test generators, and sprint forecasting platforms have delivered measurable gains at companies like Wix, Shopify, and Zapier. Experts caution that the biggest bottleneck remains organizational — teams that keep developers occupied with tasks AI can handle are leaving significant productivity gains on the table.

0 comments Read more at DEV Community

ProgrammingDEV Community ·

Race Condition Bug Caused Duplicate Charges on Single Orders, Post-Mortem Reveals

A software engineering post-mortem identified a race condition as the cause of six customers being charged twice for a single order within a 48-hour period. Two near-simultaneous payment requests for the same order both read a 'pending' status from the database before either could update it, allowing both to proceed to charge the customer. The second request initially timed out but successfully retried, resulting in two separate successful charges against one order. The root cause was the absence of a database-level lock or atomic check to prevent concurrent requests from passing the status guard simultaneously. Refunds were issued manually while engineers traced the bug through application logs and database records.

0 comments Read more at DEV Community

ProgrammingDEV Community ·

Hiring Is Broken for Both Sides — and AI Is Reshaping the Rules

A software engineer with six years of experience documented both sides of the job market this year, submitting over 100 applications while also studying employer-side hiring data. Benchmark figures from Greenhouse show applications per open role have risen 111% since 2022, while recruiter workloads have surged 412%, leaving both candidates and hiring teams overwhelmed. Despite widespread belief that companies are using AI-detection tools to screen applicants, a survey of ten major applicant tracking systems found none analyze resume text for AI authorship. What employers are actually prioritizing is detecting fraud — such as fabricated credentials and impersonation — which topped a GoodTime survey of 500+ talent leaders as the number-one hiring challenge in 2026. Research from a 204-application field experiment found that tailored AI-assisted resumes outperformed generic AI ones nearly two-to-one, suggesting the real problem is ungrounded, untailored applications rather than AI assistance itself.

0 comments Read more at DEV Community