Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!usc!snorkelwacker!mintaka!spdcc!spt!mdc From: mdc@spt.entity.com (Marty Connor) Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.misc Subject: Re: StuffIt Deluxe Summary: PUBLIC TOOLS FOR PUBLIC ARCHIVE [TM] Message-ID: <5190@spt.entity.com> Date: 30 Aug 90 16:04:24 GMT References: <2146@ux.acs.umn.edu> <1990Aug29.204448.23954@svc.portal.com> <5186@spt.entity.com> <1990Aug30.052325.10540@midway.uchicago.edu> Reply-To: mdc@spt.UUCP (Marty Connor) Organization: Hacks 'R' Us, Cambridge, MA Lines: 110 In article <1990Aug30.052325.10540@midway.uchicago.edu> dwal@ellis.uchicago.edu (David Walton) writes: >I don't see how the world under Stuffit Deluxe would be that much >different than with 1.5.1. Ok, let's go point by point. >To wit: >* Stuffit 1.5.1 was Shareware, at least in theory requiring the user > to pay a fee to use it. Stuffit Deluxe is commercial, again > requiring the user to pay a fee to use it. Deluxe is not as easy > to get without paying the fee (boy, what an outrage! Making folks > pay for the software they use?!), is more expensive, and offers > more features. So the difference here is ShareWare vs. Commercial Software. Sounds like a big difference to me. No free distribution on nets. Less trial period. Return for refund, etc., etc. >* Stuffit 1.5.1 came with UnStuffit, a free utility for unstuffing > archives so that those folks who wanted to download software didn't > have to pay to do it. Deluxe has UnStuffit Deluxe for the same > purpose, also free. This is what retail people call a "teaser". In practical terms, should this format become prevalent, people will be COMPELLED to create public archive with a proprietary tool. >* Stuffit 1.5.1's format was public. Other folks could therefore > write utilities to uncompress Stuffit archives. Deluxe's format > will be proprietary, with Aladdin giving it to people who they > think have good reason to have it. This is TOTALLY CONTRARY to the concept of a PUBLIC FACILITY. It would seem people are too ready to let Alladin dicatate what and how easy it will be to create new software to manipulate archives. >The only difference is the last point. I see no a priori reason to >think that they (Lau & Aladdin) will be unreasonably obnoxious or even >close-lipped about who gets to see the Deluxe archive format. I contend, that for public archives this makes a GREAT difference. Imagine that someone implemented and patented a great new PLAY/RECORD CD format that only their machines could decode, AND your public library started buying music stored in this format. You might object. So, the company gives free PLAYERS for this format. But to record you have to buy their boxes. I think people might object. Public libraries are different that private homes. Does the word PROPRIETARY ring a bell? Suppose down the road after we convert public archives to Stuffit Deluxe Format, Alladin gets bought out by Symantec, (who bought out MacZap (remember the program that removed copy protection from programs to they could be installed on a hard disk?)), and Symantec decides to not let people have the format at all. We then have lots of megs or software in a proprietary format, and Ray and the sweeties at Alladin are out of the picture. >And what on earth does the ability to use this format _efficiently_ on >other platforms have to do with it being public? Yes, it means that >fewer people (probably fewer non-professional developer types) will be >able to test it out immediately. That doesn't mean we'll never know >if it works well on other platforms; it doesn't necessarily mean we'll >even have to wait that much longer to know--unless Aladdin's writing >an UnStuffit for another platform themselves, it's in their interest >to get the format out to interested parties quickly, so there'll be >more products to support the standard. Public formats mean that we don't have to count on the benevolence of people at companies to be nice. The format can be discussed and improved by the community; Not just one company. >Personally, I too would prefer that the standard were public, but I >can also understand that Aladdin might rather not release it. I understand too, and I believe their reasons are WRONG for PUBLIC ARCHIVES. >And I think your accusations that Lau and Aladdin are trying to establish a >standard so they can screw us all later are both premature and >inflammatory. Premature? Shall I wait until people have uploaded software in this new proprietary format? Inflamatory, well, that's more subjective. Sometimes to wake people up you have to get their attention. I think I have succeeded. I have however also attempted to address your points as directly as I can. >If Lau/Aladdin do end up doing this, then very likely >someone will write a new standard. Used to be everything was .pit, >not .sit, after all.... So let's save a little work. Notice that .PIT was public, and so Stuffit Author Raymond Lau could just implement the format in his program. >But then, this is just my $.02. Me, I'll wait for Macintosh ZIP. Good Idea. They seem to have a good thing going. >David Walton Internet: dwal@midway.uchicago.edu Marty -- Marty Connor, Marty's Computer Workshop, "Specializing in Macintosh Training" 126 Inman Street, Cambridge, MA 02139; (617) 491-6935 mdc@entity.com, or ...{harvard|uunet}!mit-eddie!spt!mdc