Needless to say, I took personal exception. So I wrote a script to download all the photos out of a PrintRoom album. It required a perl interpreter, the LWP::Simple module, and wget installed on your system. If you don’t know what this means, the script is not for you. If you have a compatible system and are stuck with printroom, then download the script.

Whew! When it takes a whole paragraph to list essentially identical applications, maybe it’s time to stop making more of them. In any case, the scripts can be downloaded from the FaceBook battle apps page as usual. Have a great trip upwards through the ranks!

• Both can only format in the FAT filesystem. Since their primary virtue over encrypted DMGs is cross-platform portability, this probably isn’t too big of a deal.
• You can use the disk utility to reformat a mounted encrypted volume if you want another filesystem.
• With TrueCrypt volumes, you can’t eject from finder, with OSXCrypt you can eject from finder but need to complete from command-line anyway.
• OSXCrypt is MUCH faster than the official TrueCrypt release. I didn’t do benchmarking, but the difference is easily noticeable.
• You can’t copy large files into a TrueCrypt volume unless you use Disk Utility to reformat to another filesystem.
• OSXCrypt doesn’t yet do full-disk encryption, and seems to be unable to create an encrypted disk larger than 1GB.
• TrueCrypt has a GUI, but it doesn’t really feel like it was designed for mac. OSXCrypt has no GUI, but it’s pretty self-explanitory usage (I had an easier time figuring out OSXCrypt than TrueCrypt).
• It seems that OSXCrypt won’t mount images that don’t have a .img suffix (due to their usage of hdiutil).
• From what I’ve seen around the internet, OSXCrypt is currently more reliable than TrueCrypt.

While it seems neither is quite ready for day-to-day use, I’ll be sticking with OSXCrypt and/or sparseimage files for now. I’m certainly looking forward to support of full-disk encryption, however.

Now, to keep the record straight, TrueCrypt and OSXCrypt have different goals. TrueCrypt allows for steganography, encrypted disk images (something OSX has not been lacking), and full disk encryption. OSXCrypt, on the other hand, is not an encryption solution in and of itself. Instead, they provide a framework for various encryption solutions.

Personally, I don’t see anything lacking in TrueCrypt’s feature list, and a 5.0 tag is a little more reassuring to me than 6.2A. I’m going to be installing TrueCrypt shortly, but I’m wondering if anyone has had experience with OSXCrypt and recommend it.

Some quick updates that may be of interest to those considering installing one or the other:

• TrueCrypt’s OSX implementation is based on MacFUSE.
• MacFUSE comes bundled with other filesystems (NTFS, WebDav, ZFS, FTP, etc)
• OSXCrypt is probably a lighter-weight install.
• OSXCrypt has no GUI, whereas TrueCrypt does.

Also, Vampires vs Werewolves is not the same application as Vampires. I have not (nor at this time am I planning to) written any scripts/cheats for Vampires/Slayers/Zombies/etc.