February 7, 2017 at 21:40 #5434
1.x –> 2.x is a harsh transition to say the least.
- I can’t stand the new interface, too much noise. What happened to simple, clean, elegant?
- I want nothing to do with cloud and my passwords — requiring an email address just to open the program, really? I do understand there is an offline mode, not good enough.
- 1.x was a fantastic product. Why mess with it?
- I would happily purchase a license if 1.x had continued support.
What can you do to fix it?
- Allow a legacy skin to hide all the noise — call it Simple Interface.
- During installation, prompt the user: Do you want Online or Offline Mode?
- Drop the email requirement for Offline Mode. Plenty of ways to generate random data for the private key(s).
Any chance in hell of a Windows Phone version of AxCrypt?
PaulFebruary 7, 2017 at 21:59 #5435
I too dislike AxCrypt 2 but I suspect the reason for the new model is for commercial purposes and I can’t blame the developer for that. I assume he has a family / wife to feed.
I prefer the ability to use a different password per file, be able to distribute it to friends without needing them to sign-up to AxCrypt and not being required to enter an email address (real or fake) in order to use the program.
On one of my computers I use AxCrypt 2 but in order to retain the functionality of v1 (which is no longer developed) I’m using some FOSS (Free Open Source Software) from Jetico – BCArchive which is essentially the same as AxCrypt v1 except it’s being actively developed and has more bells and whistles to increase security even further – the download page is here. If you want basic then you just use the right click context menu in Windows and it works the same way as AxCrypt 1 plus you can also make self extracting archives (which you can’t in AxCrypt v2).
I really can’t see the developer of AxCrypt making a Windows Phone version – hardly anybody uses the platform any more and Microsoft aren’t committed to it. Development of software is expensive, time consuming and part of a lifecycle. I’d like to know how many paid users there are of AxCrypt – I suspect, unfortunately, there are nowhere near enough which’d make developing another piece of software extremely expensive and a waste of resources.February 8, 2017 at 07:52 #5444
Thanks for the feedback. Also Lucas, thanks for your comments.
About the interface – you don’t need to see it. Just minimize it and then use AxCrypt from Windows Explorer like you always did. It’ll stay minimized the next time you start it too. The “Enter Password” dialog looks a little different, but is actually cleaner than version 1 – which includes 2 checkbox options ;-) For regular encrypt/decrypt/open use, there is virtually *no* difference in the number of clicks and keypresses. It *is* the same! (In other words, the “Simple Interface” mode is one minimize click away).
Also about the interface – through the years, a common feature request has been an install-free portable version. I.e. a version which does *not* use Windows Explorer context menus and double-click as the main way to use. In order to do this, a user interface of some kind is required! Now, we can discuss the user interface chosen. But for a portable version to be possible, an interface is needed. AxCrypt 2 can be run in portable mode. Feature request: Check.
About the online/offline – yes, part of it has to do with commercial reasons, we need to keep track of who is who and who has paid. That’s fairly standard. But, more importantly, it allows us to move into a more modern world of public key-based cryptography for sharing – with unparalleled ease use. We feel that it’s worth it. When we have the resources we’ll probably try to develop pure offline version.
About happily paying for the 1.x – there’s always been an option to donate. If only 1% had happily donated, development of that would probably have continued. If I had made the mistake of moving from voluntary donations, to required licensing – it would have completely killed AxCrypt. Plenty of precedents. There is nothing that will stir up annoyance like when a FOSS simply goes and becomes commercial and you can’t have it for free any more. So, the only option was to redevelop a new AxCrypt, keep the basic same features free – and *add* Premium functionality. Now, you can still have AxCrypt for free, and it’s still open source. But, many will now find an incentive to pay for the premium stuff – which allows us to develop it and this benefits the free users as well. So, it simply isn’t as simple as it may look.
A Windows Phone version is actually not that impossible, but it does depend on funding. The technology we use make it if not trivial, at least, feasible to do.
Finally, AxCrypt 1.x has not changed in any essential way in 15 years. It’s time to mess with ;-)February 18, 2017 at 05:37 #5548
This has not been a pleasant transition.February 18, 2017 at 08:05 #5553
Thanks for the feedback, but if you could be more specific, it’ll help us improve!