BASALT · JOURNAL
A desktop alternative to Sejda and similar tools
Sejda and its equivalents cover a genuinely wide set of operations and run in a browser, which is their appeal and their constraint.
The limits you meet
Free tiers cap the number of tasks per period and the size of files. Both are reasonable and both bind quickly once work is routine.
Documents must be uploaded, which for confidential material is the point at which the tool stops being appropriate regardless of how good it is.
Large files are a transfer before they are an operation. A 300 MB scan has to go up and come back.
What a local replacement needs
Match against what you actually use. For most people that is merging, splitting, page removal and reordering, compression, OCR, form filling, signing and page numbering.
Anything past that is worth having and not worth switching for.
Where local is clearly better
Batches. Running one operation across a folder unattended is straightforward locally and awkward in a browser.
Repeatability. A saved sequence that runs identically each time is something a desktop tool can offer.
Confidential documents, where the upload question does not arise.
Very large files, which are already on your disk.
Where the browser stays better
A machine that is not yours. One quick operation on a file you do not care about. Sharing a link with someone else.
Those are real and there is no reason to give them up. The useful change is deciding per document rather than by habit: anything covered by privilege, an NDA or a protective order stays local, and the rest can go wherever is convenient.
Frequently asked questions
Why move from a browser PDF editor to a desktop one?
Task and file size limits on free tiers, the upload requirement for confidential documents, and transfer time on large files. Batch work and repeatable sequences are also much easier locally.
What should a desktop replacement cover?
Merging, splitting, page removal and reordering, compression, OCR, form filling, signing and page numbering covers most people's actual use. Compare against your own recent work rather than a feature list.
Are browser PDF tools still useful?
Yes, for working from a machine that is not yours, sharing a link, or a single operation on a non confidential file. The useful discipline is choosing per document rather than by habit.
What kinds of document should never be uploaded?
Anything covered by legal privilege, an NDA or a protective order, and anything where the permitted holders of the document do not include a processing service.
Doing it in Basalt
Basalt is a native macOS PDF toolkit: eighteen tools in one window covering merge, split, page organisation, compression, OCR, passwords, Bates numbering, forms, signing, watermarks and comparison. Every file is processed on your Mac, and the engine that opens documents holds no network entitlement at all, which macOS enforces at the code-signature level. Redaction destroys content rather than covering it, and an independent verifier proves the material is gone before a file is written. A one time $29 licence covers up to three Macs, free for the first 24 hours. basaltformac.com, or brew install --cask chipmunk1101/tap/basalt.
Redaction that proves itself
Basalt destroys the content you mark, then re-opens the file it wrote and proves the content is gone before it saves anything. Your documents never leave your Mac.