24 September 2010
·
After a couple of minor changes, everything seems to be working fine with the new OS X version, and I have now uploaded the final release and updated the website accordingly.
However, I’m not going to do anything to publicise it just yet. I was planning to add it to MacUpdate and other sites and so on. But then – for the third time – I posted about TextEgg on a forum and received a quick response from somebody who was convinced the application was a fraud, a con, a bad encryption program!
Thinking about it, I can see why this happens. First of all, there are undoubtedly some bad encryption programs out there. I suppose this is partly because encryption is easy to get wrong, and partly because some people think they can get away with bad encryption, because the end users won’t know any better. And they’re probably right, for the most part. But then inevitably, a minority of users come to realise that they’ve been using a bad encryption program, and they are understandably very angry.
Some time later, one of these users sees my application, which presents itself as “easy, simple and yet secure”, and they think “No way!”. Because real encryption programs just aren’t like that! If it’s claiming to be simple, it’s probably a sham. Once burned, twice shy, they express they’re outrage at my misrepresentation.
Each time this has happened, I’ve subsequently managed to convince the person concerned that TextEgg is actually a well written, genuinely secure application. But the experience is obviously worrying; will I always be ready to respond? In a way, this situation is kind of depressing, although to try to look at it from a positive light; it does show that there really is a need out there for genuinely good, but simple to use encryption software. If I can just manage to establish that that’s what TextEgg is.
In any case, as a result of this problem, I’ve decided to create a new page for the website (God knows, it could do with a few more!), explaining how TextEgg incorporates public key encryption. Hopefully I’ll manage it in a way which will both be comprehensible by people not familiar with encryption, but also enough to convince the more knowledgeable, that I know what I’m doing – it’ll be quite a challenge.
At least then, if I get more criticism, I’ll have a web page I can refer people to, rather than having to have a complicated discussion in a forum or comments format. Once I’ve done that, I’ll be able to promote it without worrying quite so much about possible negative reactions.
10 September 2010
· [2]
I’ve added a link to the Mac OS X version of TextEgg to the download page. A few people have tried it, and it seems to be working fine, but it’s still officially beta for now.
I’m now going to have to work out how to make the website appear differently for those visiting on an Apple computers rather than Windows. Then, if no new issues have been found, the Mac OS X version will be officially released, and I can finally get on with adding some new features to the software.
18 August 2010
·
Have I really not posted anything since March? I hang my head in shame! Happily, developments in the company and with TextEgg have not been quite so slow as on this blog – how could they be?
There have been some bugs fixed, the download now has code-signing so it is clearly from ‘Schimple Software’ and not that suspicious ‘Unknown Publisher’ who seems to publish so much software. The website has seen a few improvements, and things in general a moving forward. Admittedly that isn’t much, the truth is that progress has been delayed for various reasons, but that is about the change – we’re getting back in gear.
If other things have been slow, however, the blog has clearly been completely ignored; this is going to stop. There will be more regular posts, updates on progress, and so on – watch this space!
24 March 2010
·
I miss the days when spammers and other abusers of email all appeared to be either idiots, or people who relied on their victims being idiots. A couple of weeks ago I got an email about a ‘Failed delivery’ from UPS that was pretty convincing. Today I got the most impressive hoax email I’ve seen.
It’s title is ‘Facebook Password Reset Confirmation! Support Message.’ I think they made a mistake with the exclamation mark, but maybe that’s just me. The return address looks so believable, I’m not sure I want to mark it as spam, and the innocuous, helpful sounding, message:
Dear user of facebook,
Because of the measures taken to provide safety to our clients, your password has been changed.
You can find your new password in attached document.
There are really only two suspicious things about it: why would they put the password in a zip file? And the real giveaway – I don’t have a facebook account! I’ll bet it catches quite a few people out though, which is just depressing.
19 March 2010
·
I’ve been using the Firefox extension AdBlock Plus for a couple of years, and I have to admit, it never really occurred to me that there might be any reason not to. After all, I’m not sure if I’ve ever actually clicked on an advert, so why would I waste my bandwidth downloading them and put up with the distraction of looking at them.
But then I came across the article Why Ad Blocking is devastating to the sites you love and it left me feeling kind of guilty. I had been assuming that most ad revenue came from people clicking on the ads, but apparently just appearing in my peripheral vision is worth something.
I’m tempted to say – as some of the commenters on the article did – that I’m okay with a few simple ads, but when there are too many of them or they are particularly distracting, then I’m more likely to just block all of them. The problem with that of course, is that the more of us block ads, the more the websites who live on them have to display more of them.
In any case, I’ve disable AdBlock Plus for Ars Technica, and will be doing the same on other sites I value. I get a lot of valuable free reading from them, and I guess it’s not too much to ask that I give them a little – really, a very, very little – something in return.
12 March 2010
·
For anyone who’s interested, there is now a beta version of TextEgg available here. Actually there was already one there, but it was “so beta it’s embarrassing”, if you know what I mean. So much so, that I was reluctant to publicise it! Whereas this one is more “release candidate beta”.
The only thing clearly missing from it is a way to enter a license key. But since the site currently has no way for you to buy a license, let’s call that ‘appropriate’.
If anyone lets me know about a bug, or suggests a feature that I end up adding before release, then there’s a free license for them (and I’ll work out a way for you to enter it in the product soon!)
The reason I specify a “feature that I end up adding before release”, is because it’s actually very easy to think of features to add – all you need is a passing familiarity with how a word processor works! Check it out and you’ll see what I mean.
Oh – and before you try it, you may be wondering what the hell it is! Well there is also now a passable description on the home page – it still needs some tidying, but hopefully it tells you enough to convince you that the beta might be worth taking for a spin. Let me know what you think.
2 March 2010
·
Now here’s a message box you won’t see very often:
Actually it would seem that I’m free to see it more often than you might expect; I first saw it yesterday, and it popped up again for me this morning – along with an OS that seems to be continuing to work fine!
I’m not sure why I’m still using it; I have a full copy of Windows 7 Professional. I think partly it’s a microISV type curiosity about how the ‘trial version’ ends…. I just did a search on line, and apparently it’s going to start shutting down every two hours (quickly checks watch…phew!).
It’s interesting to see that the message box tells you to install “any edition of Windows 7 Ultimate”. I suppose Microsoft Marketing might be capable of coming up with multiple versions of the Ultimate (including of course the ultimate Ultimate), but I don’t think even they have actually done it! Furthermore, from what I’ve read, Windows 7 Ultimate is basically the ultimate waste of money – at least for most people – offering hardly anything that Windows 7 Professional doesn’t provide at a considerable saving.
Not that I’m meaning to criticise Microsoft too much – I like Windows 7. I haven’t been as happy to move to a new version of Windows, since Windows 2000 appeared. So I think I’ll actually do that properly now, and resist the temptation to stick around and see what happens when my two hours are up.