>>seems to do an overall better job.

Can subsantiate your statement. I said you do not own Refox (so you said somewhere else) do you own molebox? On what do you base this statement?

>>Hi Mike
>>What does Refox cost? I don't care about decompiling, only want to protect a vfp7 .exe from refox decompiling. This exe will be distributed over the internet.
>>Bill Wright
>
>Bill,
>
>We recently here had an extensive discussion about this. I don't know whether you have followed that thread. If not, it may be worth to read it. Reading it will make you aware of how the community thinks about Refox. This may be a good starting point: Re: Protect from refox Thread #1062778 Message #1063259
>
>In essence, some think it is extortion by Refox that we need Refox (costing 400 dollars!) in order to prevent decompilation by Refox. Others don't want to call it extortion, but agree that Refox is somehow unethical software. Yet others don't see anything wrong in what the maker of Refox is doing. My personal position is clear: I plea for a free utility made by the maker of Refox that will enable us to prevent decompilation by Refox. Since that is not going to happen voluntarilly, I recommend that you rather investigate a tool like Molebox, which is less expensive and seems to do an overall better job.