Guys from Enpass team please can you give me one answer on my question,
on notebook Surface Book 2 15inch, is better install traditional version 5.6.5 or windows desktop bridge version 5.6.6?

What is different?

On desktop pc i have installed traditional version, on tablet I have uwp but I not know what is best on this hybrid tablet/o/notebook 

What have "bridge version" as pros or cons?

I need only know,
what give bridge version more, than traditional version
and what haven't bridge version, than traditional version.

Additional question: maybe novice question, last few days I see in dowload tab bridge version link on file "EnpassNMHost.exe", what is this file please?

Edited January 12, 20188 yr by PepeCZ

Hey @PepeCZ

Thanks for stopping by and writing in. 

The only difference between the Bridge and the Traditional version is that the former was introduced recently for using the extension with the Edge browser. Please have a look at this blog post for the details on the different versions.

On 12/01/2018 at 4:22 PM, PepeCZ said:

Additional question: maybe novice question, last few days I see in dowload tab bridge version link on file "EnpassNMHost.exe", what is this file please?

Actually, you need to install EnpassNMHost if you want to use the Firefox WebExtensions with the Bridge version of the app. For more details, please refer the page here.

Cheers! 

Sorry Akash, that answer doesn't even come close to it.

1. The UWP version is... Universal. It works on PC, Phone and HoloLens and always looks and feels the same. The w32 Bridge/Desktop version doesn't.

2. The UWP version is great for touchscreens, the w32 Bridge/Desktop version is from the stone-age and is horrible for touch screens.

3. The UWP version supports Windows Hello biometric (un-)lock with fingerprint, face, iris and soon with palmvein recognition. Forget your password - literally!

4. The UWP version does not support browser extensions. IMHO that is a bad excuse tho… I don't see why a browser extension can't just connect to my cloud or local vault file and extract passwords from there. I understand that the UWP model will not allow apps to communicate directly to localhost - which, from a security standpoint - is a good thing. But if the UWP can connect to a cloud or a local vault file, why can't a browser extension? Other extensions certainly do...

Do I sound like a bitter UWP user? Absolutely. I've tried both versions and I'll rather have the UWP version any time - hands down. Check the store - the UWP version even has better reviews, too.