From: Alan <alano@teleport.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 1997 01:27:00 +0800
To: Arunas Norvaisa <arunas@post1.com>
Subject: Re: PGP for Windows 95
In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19970617171734.00688900@post1.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.3.96.970617095702.13050B-100000@linda.teleport.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



On Tue, 17 Jun 1997, after failing to connect with a clue-server Arunas
Norvaisa wrote:

> On 08:55 AM 97.06.17 +0000, Silvakow wrote (and I quoted):
> >
> >Has anyone yet checked out PGP for Windows 95?  It's $50 at stores 
> >right now.  Information from pgp.com, but I want to know more before 
> >I buy it.  Is it worth it?  Should I stick with PGP for DOS?  And 
> >does anyone know if those PGP public keys are compatible with DOS 
> >PGP?
> 
>  What d'ya mean??? PGP 5.0 is much more (not USD 50 in any case);
> freeware PGP (latest version 2.6.2 for USA and 2.6.3i outside US)
> is working just fine in MS-Dos shell under windoze'95... If you
> mean specific shell (what I doubt), it's not PGP itself and you'll
> still will get those dos windows anyway...

I have not seen the PGP inc. version in stores.  Possible... ($50.00 is
about the standard price for similar products at Egghead and other mass
market chains.)

As for PGP 5.0 for Win95...  It is a full version of PGP.  It is
compatible if you set the options correctly.  It also contains a number of
new signature and key formats that are not backwards compatible.  It is a
real Win95 program and not a realmode DOS hack.  (It would be nice if it
would work on my machine, but that is another story...)

As for the DOS versions "working just fine"...  That depends if you need
to use long filenames or not.  If you don't then there is no real problem.
If you do, you or the shell has to hack around it.

It might help if you go to PGP's web site and take a look about what he is
talking about bbefore commenting.

alano@teleport.com | "Those who are without history are doomed to retype it."