Talk:Enpass

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

Enpass is completely free on Windows PC and in Android and IOS, it costs about 10 US. DOLLARS for more than 20 entries/passwords. So in mobile platforms, it is not completely free. I want to know that what types of license(s) should we write in this article? Zafar24Talk 17:46, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

It's definitely not free software since it's closed-source with license limitations. "Freemium" sounds about right to me (I'd personally leave it be) but if you want to change it, gain consensus first, because this risks being a controversial change. -- Thanks, Alfie. ^{talk to me | contribs} 18:10, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

@Alfie: Thanks dear. Zafar24Talk 18:26, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

Enpass is completely free on Windows PC and in Android and IOS, it costs about 10 US. DOLLARS for more than 20 entries/passwords. So in mobile platforms, it is not completely free. I want to know that what types of license(s) should we write in this article? Zafar24Talk 19:42, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi. Have you looked at MOS:COMPUTING? "Freemium" is correct. —Codename Lisa (talk) 00:01, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

Enpass is completely free on Windows PC and in Android and IOS, it costs about 10 US. DOLLARS for more than 20 entries/passwords. So in mobile platforms, it is not completely free. Should we write both license because mobile app is not completely free?Zafar24Talk 19:42, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

@Zafar24: Why have you asked the same question three times? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 09:55, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

@Redrose64:I asked 2 times by mistake its not three times, the third one belongs to rfc which you forgot to remove see this your edit https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/824917506 you didn't removed third one.Zafar24Talk 10:09, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

You have asked three times, and all are still on this page - the first time was at 17:46, 9 February 2018 (UTC) and you asked twice more at 19:42, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

I (intentionally) did not remove the {{rfc}} template, and I didn't remove any of your three questions either. What I removed was (i) the heading "RfC (Request for comments) about the license should be freemium and premium both for Enpass" because it is entirely superfluous when the RfC that you initiated is a direct followon from the existing thread titled "Which license this software/app belongs to?"; and (ii) the |software and |rfcid=4FC6860 parameters of the {{rfc}} template - the first was invalid (valid values are listed at WP:RFC#Categories and also at Template:Rfc#Definition of topic areas), and the second needed to be removed to force Legobot (talk · contribs) to remove the entry that was added here. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 10:46, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

@Zafar24: Your refusal to get the point might eventually lead to you losing your editing privilege. You don't read the freemium, have no idea what it is and keep trying ways to circumvent the consensus-building process.

I say it for one last time: The word "freemium" describes a licensing situation in which a software developer sell a piece of computer program in several editions but one of these editions are free of charge. Usually, this edition has either a limited feature set (e.g. no more than 20 passwords) or a limited target market (e.g. only personal use).

This description is false:

Desktop: Freemium^[1]
Mobile: Freemium with limitation of 20 entries and unlimited entries in Premium^[1]

...because if you divide the app by the platform, the desktop version if freeware and the word "freemium" for the mobile platform is enough.

Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 08:37, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

As I've disclosed on this page and my User Talk page, I am editing the Enpass article to improve its accuracy and add missing details, because it's outdated and has no other active editors. I do have a conflict of interest, in that I have a working relationship with the subject of the page, so I'm hoping other editors will review my changes for neutrality, etc.

I've run into a problem I'm hoping someone might have suggestions for: There are very few good third-party sources for this article. For example:

• A lot of articles about Enpass incorrectly label it an "offline password manager," when in fact, offline is just one option for storage and syncing password vaults.

• There are third-party articles that list pricing or features, but their information is outdated, incomplete, or provide very limited detail.
• There are very few articles covering Enpass Business, let alone articles current enough to include major changes to the software.

Whereas, there is much more current, accurate, or complete information on, for example, support.enpass.io pages.

Obviously, I want to minimize using enpass.io links as citations, but they're often far more complete than the third-party articles.

Today, I edited the first two ¶ of the article, and what I've chosen to do is site a third-party source, then provide additional citations that are from enpass.io or support.enpass.io.

I'd like some feedback on this approach. RobioPro (talk) 05:36, 30 September 2024 (UTC)