3 ms·
I read the description, and though - that sounds pretty cool. But trying it sucks: 1. I don't know what these 'apps' are. Only baseshield apps or any applicati
by markessien 18y ago
I read the description, and though - that sounds pretty cool. But trying it sucks:
1. I don't know what these 'apps' are. Only baseshield apps or any applications at all?
2. I'm using Mac OS X. It offered me a .exe. Tell us that on your homepage
3. Surely you can spend a bit of money to get some proper icons and not use icons that hundreds of people are already using
4. Give me some sort of idea what apps are in there without requiring me to install a .exe. Is it worth it at all - I can't know without some idea of the apps.
In general, it's a pretty good idea, and something like this is neccessary for windows.
- dmpayton 18y agoI second #4. I don't use Windows, but I would be more than happy to recommend BaseShield to others that do if I only knew what apps were available.
- spydez 18y agoConcerning #2: Right below the giant "Install Now" button it says, "Beta | 14MB | Runs on Windows XP and Vista". I don't think they expect OS X folks to download it...
- stcredzero 18y agoActually, if you packaged a Windows installation with it, you could put a special version of this on OS X!
- skuzins 18y agoThanks for your comments! (I'm one of the founders) It works for application packages that are in the repository. Right now we have a collection of free software but we want to encourage developers to sign up and offer their apps through the store. We'll make the whole repository browseable soon so you can see what's in the store right away. We're also working on improving the design.
- bayareaguy 18y agoDepending on how far you go with the virtualization options, this scheme could be the basis of an superior browser plugin architecture. Have you guys thought much about how you might integrate with browsers?