Discussion:
SafeBoot Solo Support...
(too old to reply)
Simon Hunt
2003-12-12 10:26:54 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
All,

A little off-topic for a scramdisk group, but this seems to be the meeting
place for the PBA community at the moment.

I'm seeking comments re support of products such as DCPP and SafeBoot Solo.
The reason is my helpdesk people are suffering an increasing number of
problems caused by users messing up their Solo encrypted systems by doing
silly things, such as overwriting their rescue disks (or throwing them away)
and trashing their MBR, repartitioning their hard disk (not supported with
PBA installed), adding new hard disks, encrypting them, then trashing the
original drive and rescue disks etc... I wouldn't mind but the users
typically don't have a clue about PC's so it's especially hard to help them
help themselves. .

All these things are beyond the scope of normal PBA products to cope with,
my helpdesk has the regular task of telling users who don't know how to even
make a boot disk to dismantle their pc, pack the drive in a proper transport
container, and ship it to us for analysis at £x per hour.

I'm at a crossroads now having to decide a) to put a high price on support
for Solo, b) drop support for Solo, c) drop Solo completely, d) Give Solo
away, but offer only paid per-incident support.

If anyone from the user community would like to comment I'd love to hear
from you.

Simon.
AceMan
2003-12-12 12:20:47 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Simon Hunt
I'm at a crossroads now having to decide a) to put a high price on support
for Solo, b) drop support for Solo, c) drop Solo completely, d) Give Solo
away, but offer only paid per-incident support.
If anyone from the user community would like to comment I'd love to hear
from you.
Simon.
Please, please whatever you do, don't do (C) :)

(A) and (D) seem like the most viable option really. I think if you
drop support completely it will lead to people just giving up on the
software if they come across a problem that they feel they can't
resolve reasonably quickly. Mind you, that probably would make your
life easier if that happened though :)
howamidifferent
2003-12-12 12:47:45 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Simon,
From your choices listed below

"I'm at a crossroads now having to decide
a) to put a high price on support for Solo,
b) drop support for Solo,
c) drop Solo completely,
d) Give Solo away, but offer only paid per-incident support."

As a registered user of the software I would suggest (A) since those of us
who paid for the product would be rightly pissed off if you discontinue it
or its support completely or give it away for nothing to other users. If
someone is stupid enough to install an encryption system on their disk
without having a basic understanding of how the OS/MBR work then they should
expect to pay for technical support. You pour coffee into your monitor you
pay for it, you trash your disk through stupidity you pay for it...Even with
choice A above, I think every user deserves free support for at least one
call/issue regarding the operation of the software itself.
If it is determined that the problem is caused by the user and not the
software then slap a fee on it for further support. This will allow genuine
bug reports / faults to be reported without expecting the user to pay for
the priviledge.

Just my two cents...
Post by Simon Hunt
All,
A little off-topic for a scramdisk group, but this seems to be the meeting
place for the PBA community at the moment.
I'm seeking comments re support of products such as DCPP and SafeBoot Solo.
The reason is my helpdesk people are suffering an increasing number of
problems caused by users messing up their Solo encrypted systems by doing
silly things, such as overwriting their rescue disks (or throwing them away)
and trashing their MBR, repartitioning their hard disk (not supported with
PBA installed), adding new hard disks, encrypting them, then trashing the
original drive and rescue disks etc... I wouldn't mind but the users
typically don't have a clue about PC's so it's especially hard to help them
help themselves. .
All these things are beyond the scope of normal PBA products to cope with,
my helpdesk has the regular task of telling users who don't know how to even
make a boot disk to dismantle their pc, pack the drive in a proper transport
container, and ship it to us for analysis at £x per hour.
I'm at a crossroads now having to decide a) to put a high price on support
for Solo, b) drop support for Solo, c) drop Solo completely, d) Give Solo
away, but offer only paid per-incident support.
If anyone from the user community would like to comment I'd love to hear
from you.
Simon.
AceMan
2003-12-12 12:59:51 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Fri, 12 Dec 2003 12:47:45 -0000, "howamidifferent"
Even with choice A above, I think every user deserves free support for at least one
call/issue regarding the operation of the software itself.
If it is determined that the problem is caused by the user and not the
software then slap a fee on it for further support. This will allow genuine
bug reports / faults to be reported without expecting the user to pay for
the priviledge.
IMO I also think this would be the best move forward. Most users will
grudge paying for support if it is a problem caused by the software
whereas if the problem is caused by the user then I don't really think
they can complain about paying for support.

Hopefully this would also encourage the more "non-technical" users to
think twice before playing around with potentially disastrous
consequences.
Simon Hunt
2003-12-12 14:19:44 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
I should have said at the beginning that this won't affect current
registered users, only future users.

I'm thinking there may be another option, which is a fixed price data
recovery service in the case that the user has messed with the MBR,
partition layout etc. We can almost always get the data back given the
recovery disk - in fact recently we decrypted someone's 200GB USB drive
which they had somehow convinced their PC was a bios supported disk...

thanks for the positive attitude feedback though.

Simon.
Post by howamidifferent
Simon,
From your choices listed below
"I'm at a crossroads now having to decide
a) to put a high price on support for Solo,
b) drop support for Solo,
c) drop Solo completely,
d) Give Solo away, but offer only paid per-incident support."
As a registered user of the software I would suggest (A) since those of us
who paid for the product would be rightly pissed off if you discontinue it
or its support completely or give it away for nothing to other users. If
someone is stupid enough to install an encryption system on their disk
without having a basic understanding of how the OS/MBR work then they should
expect to pay for technical support. You pour coffee into your monitor you
pay for it, you trash your disk through stupidity you pay for it...Even with
choice A above, I think every user deserves free support for at least one
call/issue regarding the operation of the software itself.
If it is determined that the problem is caused by the user and not the
software then slap a fee on it for further support. This will allow genuine
bug reports / faults to be reported without expecting the user to pay for
the priviledge.
Just my two cents...
Post by Simon Hunt
All,
A little off-topic for a scramdisk group, but this seems to be the meeting
place for the PBA community at the moment.
I'm seeking comments re support of products such as DCPP and SafeBoot
Solo.
Post by Simon Hunt
The reason is my helpdesk people are suffering an increasing number of
problems caused by users messing up their Solo encrypted systems by doing
silly things, such as overwriting their rescue disks (or throwing them
away)
Post by Simon Hunt
and trashing their MBR, repartitioning their hard disk (not supported with
PBA installed), adding new hard disks, encrypting them, then trashing the
original drive and rescue disks etc... I wouldn't mind but the users
typically don't have a clue about PC's so it's especially hard to help
them
Post by Simon Hunt
help themselves. .
All these things are beyond the scope of normal PBA products to cope with,
my helpdesk has the regular task of telling users who don't know how to
even
Post by Simon Hunt
make a boot disk to dismantle their pc, pack the drive in a proper
transport
Post by Simon Hunt
container, and ship it to us for analysis at £x per hour.
I'm at a crossroads now having to decide a) to put a high price on support
for Solo, b) drop support for Solo, c) drop Solo completely, d) Give Solo
away, but offer only paid per-incident support.
If anyone from the user community would like to comment I'd love to hear
from you.
Simon.
Ayatolah
2003-12-12 02:12:23 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Simon Hunt
All,
A little off-topic for a scramdisk group, but this seems to be the meeting
place for the PBA community at the moment.
I'm seeking comments re support of products such as DCPP and SafeBoot Solo.
The reason is my helpdesk people are suffering an increasing number of
problems caused by users messing up their Solo encrypted systems by doing
silly things, such as overwriting their rescue disks (or throwing them away)
and trashing their MBR, repartitioning their hard disk (not supported with
<snivel snip>

Your software is a potential danger to
a user's system whether newbie or expert.

Blaming it on user's 'silliness' is damn lame.

Take your problems elsewhere
-----------> alt.safeboot.trashes.your.system

And don't come back!
Simon Hunt
2003-12-12 14:21:23 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
dont feed the trolls!
Post by Ayatolah
Post by Simon Hunt
All,
A little off-topic for a scramdisk group, but this seems to be the meeting
place for the PBA community at the moment.
I'm seeking comments re support of products such as DCPP and SafeBoot Solo.
The reason is my helpdesk people are suffering an increasing number of
problems caused by users messing up their Solo encrypted systems by doing
silly things, such as overwriting their rescue disks (or throwing them away)
and trashing their MBR, repartitioning their hard disk (not supported with
<snivel snip>
Your software is a potential danger to
a user's system whether newbie or expert.
Blaming it on user's 'silliness' is damn lame.
Take your problems elsewhere
-----------> alt.safeboot.trashes.your.system
And don't come back!
AceMan
2003-12-12 14:27:38 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Simon Hunt
dont feed the trolls!
Ooops, too late. I think I already did :)
AceMan
2003-12-12 14:26:52 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ayatolah
Your software is a potential danger to
a user's system whether newbie or expert.
Wrong!
Post by Ayatolah
Blaming it on user's 'silliness' is damn lame.
No, it's not.
Post by Ayatolah
Take your problems elsewhere
-----------> alt.safeboot.trashes.your.system
And don't come back!
Oh dear, a troll hiding behind a remailer.

This is obviously one user whose "silliness" must have trashed their
system and they've now got a grudge to bear.

<sigh>
Anonymous
2003-12-12 14:46:43 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Ayatolah wrote:

<snip>

Flush!
2003-12-12 17:38:50 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Simon Hunt
I'm at a crossroads now having to decide a) to put a high price on
support for Solo, b) drop support for Solo, c) drop Solo completely,
d) Give Solo away, but offer only paid per-incident support.
I'd say your only option now is to make it freeware + limited or
no support. You probably know that there is a freeware product
called Compusec and that it does more or less the same job as
SafeBoot Solo. Hope this helps.
farkus
2003-12-14 01:05:56 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Simon Hunt
All,
A little off-topic for a scramdisk group, but this seems to be the meeting
place for the PBA community at the moment.
I'm seeking comments re support of products such as DCPP and SafeBoot Solo.
The reason is my helpdesk people are suffering an increasing number of
problems caused by users messing up their Solo encrypted systems by doing
silly things, such as overwriting their rescue disks (or throwing them away)
and trashing their MBR, repartitioning their hard disk (not supported with
PBA installed), adding new hard disks, encrypting them, then trashing the
original drive and rescue disks etc... I wouldn't mind but the users
typically don't have a clue about PC's so it's especially hard to help them
help themselves. .
All these things are beyond the scope of normal PBA products to cope with,
my helpdesk has the regular task of telling users who don't know how to even
make a boot disk to dismantle their pc, pack the drive in a proper transport
container, and ship it to us for analysis at £x per hour.
I'm at a crossroads now having to decide a) to put a high price on support
for Solo, b) drop support for Solo, c) drop Solo completely, d) Give Solo
away, but offer only paid per-incident support.
If anyone from the user community would like to comment I'd love to hear
from you.
Simon.
You should have spent a lot of time thinking about this on the
front-end. When I saw your product announced, one of the first things
that came to my mind was that it would be a support nightmare. There
aren't that many software products that screw around with your MBR.
Drive imaging, low-level software tools and OS installation are the
few things that do, and each can be fraught with peril. There's too
many things that can go wrong, and eventually... even with experienced
users, they will. And when those types of things go wrong, they go
horribly wrong, taking out your entire file system. Recovery from
something like a hosed MBR is scary enough under normal circumstances,
but coupling that with an encrypted drive makes the problem terribly
complicated. The normal run-of-the-mill user (a FULL 98% of users)
will have huge problems with this. So, you're targeting a very
dangerous product to a public that only 2% can handle with ease.

What did you think would happen?
AceMan
2003-12-14 01:45:33 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sat, 13 Dec 2003 20:05:56 -0500, farkus <***@bygone.org> wrote:

<snip>
Post by farkus
What did you think would happen?
You're not really answering the question or offering any constructive
input are you?

You are however apparently a troll.

<sigh>
farkus
2003-12-15 02:06:48 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Anonymous
<snip>
Post by farkus
What did you think would happen?
You're not really answering the question or offering any constructive
input are you?
You are however apparently a troll.
<sigh>
The question has no answer. The OP was asking for comments and I gave
him some, constructive or no. These gentlemen are in the business of
distributing software, and should be prepared to deal with the
realities. One of the first questions asked before beginning
distribution is "what are the support costs?". A cursory glance at
this product would have indicated a high number of support incidents
due to it's complexity. I have no suggestion to offer that they could
not think of themselves, and since I'm not familiar with their
business model, I'm not in a position to make an intelligent
recommendation.
Simon Hunt
2003-12-15 20:09:36 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
I consider Farkus's comments constructive..

all I can say is you should have seen what we ORIGINALLY planned for Solo,
online registration, secure hosted recovery key servers etc.. it was great
(from a technical point of view)... Then we delayed the project for a year,
dumped the "SafeNET" recovery service as we called it then and released Solo
in the form it is now because we thought keeping it simple was best.

Remember, although you might think me bullish to say so, CBI never intended,
or needed, to make a profit off of Solo as it stands now, and, as long as we
don't make a loss from it we're happy to leave it as it is. It's a marketing
toy for the company, and a pet project of mine. Before DIP, Solo was the
only product in the market and we give it away for acorns. Whereas SecurStar
has to make a profit out of DCPP etc, and are pouring revenue into
development and new features, CBI would rather sell 60,000 copies of
SafeBoot Ent to the French school system. Ask Shaun H how long he thinks it
will be before 60,000 Joe-public users register DCPP... CBI and SecurStar
have completely different aims. I'm not belittling Shaun and Paul's stance -
I really respect what they are trying to achieve, and I'm amazed in how well
they are doing, but I don't think we are competing at the same level - if we
are then maybe I should take more notice. :-)

The position I am in is sitting on the fence between Solo being a useful
product for the community and public, and Solo being as you rightly say too
dangerous for the public at large - which is why I'm seeking peoples
opinion. Do I drop it to save the public, or keep it and put up with abuse
from customers who say "Well, SBS should have WARNED me when I started
el-cheepo drive repartitioner that it wasn't going to work..."

Let's keep this thread light Ladies and Gents.

Simon.
Post by Anonymous
<snip>
Post by farkus
What did you think would happen?
You're not really answering the question or offering any constructive
input are you?
You are however apparently a troll.
<sigh>
AceMan
2003-12-15 21:19:53 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Simon Hunt
I consider Farkus's comments constructive..
<snip>
Post by Simon Hunt
Let's keep this thread light Ladies and Gents.
Simon.
Yes, I apologise for my initial response to farkus. (Farkus, please
accept my apologies. I did not mean to 'have a go' at you :)

I mistakenly assumed he didn't have anything sensible to add and was
merely trolling. I see from his follow-up to me that he was merely
expressing his opinion in a very rational way.

I apologise for my antagonistic comments. Did not mean to offend
anyone.

Sorry Farkus :)

P.S. I'll shut-up now so we can get back to the original topic.
nemo (nemo outis)
2003-12-16 02:23:09 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
In article <duoDb.327$***@newsfep1-win.server.ntli.net>, "Simon Hunt" <***@never.com> wrote:


It is very difficult for me to give you constructive advice (in
the sense of being genuinely useful to your company and its
goals). Even if it were a "wild success" Safeboot Solo could
likely never be justified as contributing much to the bottom
line.

Its value, if any, is in terms of "missionary marketing" -
raising and broadening the general consciousness of the
public. And, more narrowly, as a loss leader to get folks to
recognize the value of your products at the personal level and
then recommend them at the corporate scale.

I am desperately eager to see SS continue - and so my judgment is
clouded. So, although you must add a large grain of salt, here's
my recommendation:

While the benefits to your company are soft at best, continue SS
for the above reasons and for one more - as a "usability
testbed." After all, if you can make it as nearly as possible
idiot-proof for idiots, you will have learned much :-) (Idiots
are amazingly versatile and resourceful folks!)

Here's another angle. While SS can't be expected to make much
money on the upside, then, conversely, it is unlikely to cost all
that much on the downside - even with support for morons thrown
in. View SS as roughly a nearly self-financing marketing
campaign - targeted at "brand awareness" rather than direct
sales of SS. Only if you thought - on balance - that
disappointed users of SS (i.e., the morons who are black holes
for support) were damaging your corporate reputation more than
satisfied users were augmenting it, would I advise you to drop
SS.

Regards,
Simon Hunt
2003-12-16 09:28:19 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
ever a voice of reason Nemo... ;-)

I'll announce our decision in the week of 12th Jan. Thanks to all in advance
who choose to contribute.

Merry Christmas!

Simon.
Post by nemo (nemo outis)
It is very difficult for me to give you constructive advice (in
the sense of being genuinely useful to your company and its
goals). Even if it were a "wild success" Safeboot Solo could
likely never be justified as contributing much to the bottom
line.
Its value, if any, is in terms of "missionary marketing" -
raising and broadening the general consciousness of the
public. And, more narrowly, as a loss leader to get folks to
recognize the value of your products at the personal level and
then recommend them at the corporate scale.
I am desperately eager to see SS continue - and so my judgment is
clouded. So, although you must add a large grain of salt, here's
While the benefits to your company are soft at best, continue SS
for the above reasons and for one more - as a "usability
testbed." After all, if you can make it as nearly as possible
idiot-proof for idiots, you will have learned much :-) (Idiots
are amazingly versatile and resourceful folks!)
Here's another angle. While SS can't be expected to make much
money on the upside, then, conversely, it is unlikely to cost all
that much on the downside - even with support for morons thrown
in. View SS as roughly a nearly self-financing marketing
campaign - targeted at "brand awareness" rather than direct
sales of SS. Only if you thought - on balance - that
disappointed users of SS (i.e., the morons who are black holes
for support) were damaging your corporate reputation more than
satisfied users were augmenting it, would I advise you to drop
SS.
Regards,
Frode
2003-12-16 10:01:17 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Simon Hunt
The position I am in is sitting on the fence between Solo being a useful
product for the community and public, and Solo being as you rightly say
too dangerous for the public at large - which is why I'm seeking peoples
opinion. Do I drop it to save the public, or keep it and put up with abuse
from customers who say "Well, SBS should have WARNED me when I started
el-cheepo drive repartitioner that it wasn't going to work..."
A huge pre-install infopage complete with a mandatory questionaire at the
bottom forcing people to prove they've read the above, where such things
are covered, should solve that :P

Joking aside, it doesn't seem impossible to inform people of a few "don't
even think about it" situations.

A few things working against this:

It's been a good whiles now since I installed SBS, so I can't be sure, but
I don't seem to recall any major warnings prior to installation or initial
encryption when it comes to harddrive reconfiguring while encrypted. No
mention of safeboot.fs in relation to defragging, something even many home
users do at irregular intervals. Why would the average joe suspect
defragging, something he's been told for years is a great thing for his
computer, can break it after SBS is installed unless an exclusion is added?
Yes, it's covered in the FAQ on the web, but most don't go there until
after a problem's appeared. Same applies to other tools. Unless told, they
have no way of knowing.

Peeking at the helpfile (for 4.1.1 which is what came with 4.1.3a
apparently) there's numerous dead links in there and very little actual
information.

One of the things the helpfile states is "Most importantly, SafeBoot Solo
can be fixed or recovered if you forget your password or break your
computer, but only if you have a "Recovery Disk" - without it, your data is
lost. ". Based on this, a computer illiterate has no reason to think
there's any tool s/he could run that would make the machine difficult to
recover. Of course, this is assuming the person even reads the helpfile.

My point being, unless very specifically told SBS needs to be taken into
account before making changes to a system, a non-geek has no way of knowing
what not to do.

An alternative to making SBS free and supportless, might be free and
community supported. Either by opening a forum for it controlled by your
company, or directing users to an appropriate newsgroup or publically
controlled forum. You/your support staff could then poke their noses in
when time permits to offer brief advice that those others in the know could
"translate" into step-by-step procedures for the regular user if they so
choose. If an end-user has need of more than that, they're left no choice
but to pack up the drive and pay for the fixing, or format and start anew.
No different than if they manage to muck up their store-bought PC for any
other reason.


- --
Frode
optional
2007-12-27 20:44:08 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Simon, please update us on the actual current status of Safeboot Solo.
I am a registered owner and user of the program, and the last I heard
was that the company discontinued sales of SS. I just checked the web
site and I can find no mention of SS. But here you are talking about
the possibility of "drop Solo completely," which makes it sound as if
it's still available somewhere. So what's the story?

You also mention DCPP. That sounds like Drive Crypt Plus Pack, am I
right? I thought that was a whole different company. Or did somebody
buy somebody out?

Please fill us in.
Post by Simon Hunt
All,
A little off-topic for a scramdisk group, but this seems to be the meeting
place for the PBA community at the moment.
I'm seeking comments re support of products such as DCPP and SafeBoot Solo.
The reason is my helpdesk people are suffering an increasing number of
problems caused by users messing up their Solo encrypted systems by doing
silly things, such as overwriting their rescue disks (or throwing them away)
and trashing their MBR, repartitioning their hard disk (not supported with
PBA installed), adding new hard disks, encrypting them, then trashing the
original drive and rescue disks etc... I wouldn't mind but the users
typically don't have a clue about PC's so it's especially hard to help them
help themselves. .
All these things are beyond the scope of normal PBA products to cope with,
my helpdesk has the regular task of telling users who don't know how to even
make a boot disk to dismantle their pc, pack the drive in a proper transport
container, and ship it to us for analysis at £x per hour.
I'm at a crossroads now having to decide a) to put a high price on support
for Solo, b) drop support for Solo, c) drop Solo completely, d) Give Solo
away, but offer only paid per-incident support.
If anyone from the user community would like to comment I'd love to hear
from you.
Simon.
optional
2007-12-27 20:57:20 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Oops.

Using a new server that has years of retention (rather than weeks as I
was used to) and so I replied to a message fro Dec. 2003 thinking it
was from December 2007.
Post by optional
Simon, please update us on the actual current status of Safeboot Solo.
I am a registered owner and user of the program, and the last I heard
was that the company discontinued sales of SS. I just checked the web
site and I can find no mention of SS. But here you are talking about
the possibility of "drop Solo completely," which makes it sound as if
it's still available somewhere. So what's the story?
You also mention DCPP. That sounds like Drive Crypt Plus Pack, am I
right? I thought that was a whole different company. Or did somebody
buy somebody out?
Please fill us in.
Post by Simon Hunt
All,
A little off-topic for a scramdisk group, but this seems to be the meeting
place for the PBA community at the moment.
I'm seeking comments re support of products such as DCPP and SafeBoot Solo.
The reason is my helpdesk people are suffering an increasing number of
problems caused by users messing up their Solo encrypted systems by doing
silly things, such as overwriting their rescue disks (or throwing them away)
and trashing their MBR, repartitioning their hard disk (not supported with
PBA installed), adding new hard disks, encrypting them, then trashing the
original drive and rescue disks etc... I wouldn't mind but the users
typically don't have a clue about PC's so it's especially hard to help them
help themselves. .
All these things are beyond the scope of normal PBA products to cope with,
my helpdesk has the regular task of telling users who don't know how to even
make a boot disk to dismantle their pc, pack the drive in a proper transport
container, and ship it to us for analysis at £x per hour.
I'm at a crossroads now having to decide a) to put a high price on support
for Solo, b) drop support for Solo, c) drop Solo completely, d) Give Solo
away, but offer only paid per-incident support.
If anyone from the user community would like to comment I'd love to hear
from you.
Simon.
Carsten Krueger
2007-12-27 21:33:10 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by optional
So what's the story?
SB Solo is dead for years, wait for Truecrypt 5.0 (Jan 2008)
--
ID = 0x2BFBF5D8 FP = 53CA 1609 B00A D2DB A066 314C 6493 69AB 2BFB F5D8
http://www.realname-diskussion.info - Realnames sind keine Pflicht
http://www.spamgourmet.com/ + http://www.temporaryinbox.com/ - Antispam
cakruege (at) gmail (dot) com | http://www.geocities.com/mungfaq/
optional
2007-12-27 22:51:44 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Thu, 27 Dec 2007 22:33:10 +0100, Carsten Krueger
Post by Carsten Krueger
Post by optional
So what's the story?
SB Solo is dead for years, wait for Truecrypt 5.0 (Jan 2008)
Yeah, that post was from 2003, so presumably they pulled SS early in
2004. That makes it almost four years. But it still works with XP. I
suppose with Vista one will need to go with the new Truecrypt.
SafeBoot Simon
2007-12-29 15:39:40 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by optional
On Thu, 27 Dec 2007 22:33:10 +0100, Carsten Krueger
Post by Carsten Krueger
Post by optional
So what's the story?
SB Solo is dead for years, wait for Truecrypt 5.0 (Jan 2008)
Yeah, that post was from 2003, so presumably they pulled SS early in
2004.  That makes it almost four years.  But it still works with XP. I
suppose with Vista one will need to go with the new Truecrypt.
Yup, we pulled it in 2004, there's nothing to prevent it making a
comeback though if there was a market for it. Personally I got tired
of getting flamed all the time so I doubt I have the stamina to
resurect the project.
optional
2008-01-01 16:55:18 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sat, 29 Dec 2007 07:39:40 -0800 (PST), SafeBoot Simon
Post by SafeBoot Simon
Post by optional
On Thu, 27 Dec 2007 22:33:10 +0100, Carsten Krueger
Post by Carsten Krueger
Post by optional
So what's the story?
SB Solo is dead for years, wait for Truecrypt 5.0 (Jan 2008)
Yeah, that post was from 2003, so presumably they pulled SS early in
2004.  That makes it almost four years.  But it still works with XP. I
suppose with Vista one will need to go with the new Truecrypt.
Yup, we pulled it in 2004, there's nothing to prevent it making a
comeback though if there was a market for it. Personally I got tired
of getting flamed all the time so I doubt I have the stamina to
resurect the project.
I think there always was a market for it. The only alternative,
AFAIK, was Compusec, which I never tried, but which I heard was not so
simple and easy to set up.

But now with the new version of Truecrypt coming out things may be
different. If TC works well then I think a lot of the SS potential
customers will go with it.

As for the flaming you had to endure, that goes with the territory.
You knew SS was a good product, and so did almost everybody else.
Trolls are inevitable in a forum like Usenet. I think it is
neccessary to not take it personally but to take it for what it really
is: meaningless noise. Easier said than done, I know.

Loading...