Comparison
domscout vs running Puppeteer yourself
Puppeteer is a free, well-maintained library for driving Chrome, and for plenty of jobs it is the right tool. What it does not give you is the service around it: the browser to host, the queue, the retries, and the step from HTML to something a model can read. This page sets out that work, what domscout replaces, and when to keep Puppeteer.
The same job, both ways
Render a page at 1280 by 800, save a screenshot, and print the page as Markdown. On the left, the library and a converter on a machine you run. On the right, one request.
What you run when you run it yourself
The script above is the easy part. These are the parts that turn it into something other code can depend on.
When to keep Puppeteer
If one of these describes your work, running Puppeteer yourself is the better choice.
- You test your own app in CI against localhost or a private network. domscout only reaches public addresses.
- Your targets block scrapers. Every domscout capture leaves from one network address, with no proxy rotation and no captcha solving.
- You run enough volume on machines you already pay for that per-capture pricing costs more than your own compute.
- Your script runs a long interactive session: many steps, state carried between them, your own JavaScript evaluated in the page. domscout accepts up to 25 actions per capture, and running your own JavaScript needs Business and an account entitlement.
Comparing hosted services instead? domscout vs Firecrawl, ScreenshotOne and Browserless · domscout vs Playwright
Give your product a browser.
Get clean web content and visual proof into your workflow in minutes.