On 31 Jul 2012 09:35:01 GMT, Bear <
bearbo...@gmai.com> wrote:
>"
embeddedsw.net" <
blackv...@yahoo.it> wrote in news:2531a064-3493-
>
4b09-b825-2...@googlegroups.com:
>
>>
>> I hope that somebody wll review OpenPuff
>> a little better than "decent" !
>>
>> In fact this piece of software has been
>> brought to you through years of hard work,
>> with the aim to build the most powerful
>> stego-tool that you could ever need !
>>
>> Hints are welcome if somebody feels that
>> something important is missing and needs
>> to be added right now.
>>
>> The author.
>>
>
>As I told you in reply to your email to me:
>
>"I suppose I should have written it is great software, as such it is. Zo
>is a bit testy and I didn't want to overwhelm him. I've had Puff listed
>on BearWare as best in class for a long time [which you know]. I only
>list software I've determined to be best in class.
Quite honestly what skills do you have to test this software? You can
test the functionality/user experience, but little else. If anyone is
considering hiding something important, something their life, or
livelihood depends upon, your recommendation is worthless.
>Most of the time, I
>rarely find something better and my choices usually stand firm for a
>long time. Puff is no exception to this as I have found nothing better
>to replace it.
You're inflating your own self worth again. You'll never get any respect
from anyone worth a shit that way. You haven't even got the humility to
recognise your own limitations. You can just about put a bit of HTML
together, your endorsement of this product is fucking ludicrous, and it
casts doubt that the author of what I assumed to be a serious piece
seeks your endorsement. Scary.
>Thank you for your generous contribution to the freeware world."
Yeah, yeah. Here we go. Another pillar trying to erect itself. More air.
Try giving us a proper technical evaluation of this software. Good luck,
I won't wait up.