1995-08-12 - Re: PRZ encrypted voice software release imminent

Header Data

From: jcaldwel@iquest.net (James Caldwell)
To: vznuri@netcom.com
Message Hash: cd32bec18eb79768178b7c82fc534d98f33fd04fe5fccb907ae388f90b54753b
Message ID: <lSCLw4NQnoAb083yn@iquest.net>
Reply To: <v02120d06ac515d75289e@[199.2.22.120]>
UTC Datetime: 1995-08-12 05:36:55 UTC
Raw Date: Fri, 11 Aug 95 22:36:55 PDT

Raw message

From: jcaldwel@iquest.net (James Caldwell)
Date: Fri, 11 Aug 95 22:36:55 PDT
To: vznuri@netcom.com
Subject: Re: PRZ encrypted voice software release imminent
In-Reply-To: <v02120d06ac515d75289e@[199.2.22.120]>
Message-ID: <lSCLw4NQnoAb083yn@iquest.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



>Of course, if it was a substantial improvement over the
>other "Internet Phone" stuff that's out there, and had
>a good way of dealing with switching, etc., then people
>would use it to make "free" l.d. phone calls on the net,
>and the cryptography would get a free ride.


>Generally, you are right in suggesting that anything that
>requires people to crawl behind their computers, attach
>new cables, purchase and debug a sound card under Windows,
>and generally engage in techno-weenie hardware manipulations
>will have less appeal than something plug and play. Even
>given the extremely user-hostile elements of PGP the software,
>I would be surprised if PGPFone became as popular.

Hmm, oportunities for 'consulting fees' abound in setting up PGP, PGPFone
is another one. ;-)








Thread