-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 > What I was trying to do was bring a real world perspective to > this question. Are you using PGP 8? Do you know anybody who > is using PGP 8?
Yes and yes. I far prefer PGP 8.1 over PGP 9.0+, and I've heard comments from many other users who say likewise. The thing which is killing PGP 8.1 is its lack of support for creating SHA256 messages, not its age. > Since PGP 8 was released in December 2002 and nothing has been > done with it for 4-1/2 years now, it is getting pretty long in > tooth. Many people still use PGP 6.5.8, which dates back to pre-2000. > PGP Corporation is up to at least PGP 10.x the last time > I checked (last year). PGP 9.6 is the latest. - -- Robert J. Hansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> "Most people are never thought about after they're gone. 'I wonder where Rob got the plutonium?' is better than most get." -- Phil Munson -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (Darwin) iFYEAREIAAYFAkZ5X0MACgkQf2XByo0Cu7PxqwDeK9GRjV6j4Ho2YIKmba0aVWZK HaHgMWbXDHsAVADeOK8A9lkXh6s5Tl9H1BPTOLHBdj1r5WI1jSLD+4kBHAQBAQgA BgUCRnlfQwAKCRC3APSC/q+BCd0GCADhC4RDSzChe0mB7j3ogPR49dOH9vlK92v1 fv/NXqPCGv7D8oa5R4cPYpsleL84Kmx6M1+6yqeGt42jz2s4B+yAK6KJ4UFM2kKY lI+bU6QTBf0eLtndSCwaNTARUSYly8ywZGlKoaGuS0zddWff0lmbtQbHabHUBxlE PdaIvPb+nBxhxfaShoBi5vFZdhAQV6sWrRbxblr1NTRq8iPBlPZDHBDMpw+wVbQ3 ZDXmHYfJZb9/oIeSEJoiwiFfU3eb+Opix6KvArHYP5oTmSr5F3xplKy/+J7aGW6Z vggHFWjH5SmJv3Zp82wxqWsW6Qpnocge4wzj6uJXRbK9gCHJFgpu =eE9A -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
