CipherBit or CipherByte? On 12/06/2014 01:57, Karen Palen wrote: > Alain, > > Sadly I think you are correct - the brand name is ever bit as important > as the actual functioning of the software! > > Personally I like "CypherVault" better than "CryptoShed" on that basis. > I am sure there is a huge amount to come on this issue. > > For all the coders want to "just make it work" (been there, done that) > these fundamental building blocks need to be done properly! > > Mike > > On 06/11/2014 05:36 PM, Alain Forget wrote: >> I'll think more on this and hopefully throw out some ideas tomorrow, >> but CryptoVault is good. Also, to the average person, "TrueCrypt" is a >> pretty meaningless name, but some may easily argue it was one of the >> most successful, usable, trustworthy, and widely-adopted encryption >> technologies. So my point is that we don't need to get the name perfect. >> >> Alain >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: ciphershed-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx >> [mailto:ciphershed-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Daniel Myshkin >> Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2014 20:26 >> To: ciphershed@xxxxxxxxxxxxx >> Subject: [ciphershed] Re: Rebranding >> >> >> Unfortunately, I have little to zero imagination (literally). My >> only >> contribution to this thread is 'CipherVault', which someone has >> probably >> already thrown out there and I simply missed it. Or maybe >> something like >> 'CryptoVault'. >> >> >> >> >> I like "CryptoVault" ; it sounds the way it supposed to work :-) . >> >> >> >> > -- -- At the time of writing, no warrants have been served to me, nor am I under any legal compulsion concerning the CipherShed project. I do not know of any searches of seizures of my assets.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
