Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!mips!apple!snorkelwacker!mintaka!spdcc!spt!mdc From: mdc@spt.entity.com (Marty Connor) Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.misc Subject: Re: StuffIt Deluxe Summary: IMPORTANT ISSUES INSIDE. PLEASE READ THIS MESSAGE Message-ID: <5299@spt.entity.com> Date: 3 Sep 90 06:48:37 GMT References: <2146@ux.acs.umn.edu> <1990Aug29.204448.23954@svc.portal.com> <5186@spt.entity.com> <1990Aug30.043630.4167@morrow.stanford.edu> <1990Aug31.170355.28215@svc.portal.com> <5224@spt.entity.com> <1990Sep2.185740.2049@svc.portal.com> Reply-To: mdc@spt.UUCP (Marty Connor) Organization: Hacks 'R' Us, Cambridge, MA Lines: 154 ... This article is in reply to article <1990Sep2.185740.2049@svc.portal.com> from leonardr@svc.portal.com (Leonard Rosenthol) Leonard, first I appreciate your representing Alladin on the net. By doing so you make it possible to have a public dialog that would be much more difficult otherwise. I am representing many people who feel it is inappropriate to have public archives stored in proprietary formats. You are (presumably) representing the best interest of Alladin, else (for business reasons) they would not have chosen you to speak for them. Your last message is confusing is some ways. In article <1990Sep2.185740.2049@svc.portal.com> leonardr@svc.portal.com (Leonard Rosenthol) You write: > I am as much in favor of this discussion as you. This is a VERY >important issue to the net, and to users at large, and it needs to be >resolved. This much I agree with. This issue is important, and needs to be resolved, at least for now. But then you say: >I do think, however, that there is a difference between trying >to raise issues and being a stubborn goat. Barnyard animals aside, I assume the implication is that I am being stubborn. Perhaps. But Perhaps through my stubborness an important principle will be protected. A principle of greater importance than the profits of one small software company. Perhaps through this stubborness more people will see that if Alladin is allowed to set a proprietary standard in compression/archiving for the Macintosh Community, the people I represent (those without financial interests in Alladin) will suffer a great setback. >I am listening to everything you that you say, and am in daily >contact with Aladdin discussing what I see here. If there is a >'middle-of-the-road' that exists, where we can all be happy, I hope >we can find it. Have you considered that a 'middle-of-the-road' solution may not be appropriate? Alladin is (in our view) attempting to gain proprietary control of public data. This is a *very serious* situation. Consider the following argument: Alladin (Ray Lau) created the Macintosh archiving/compression standard in the following way: 1. Raymond Lau Created a program which INCORPORATED important PREVIOUS STANDARDS (BINHEX/PACKIT) 2. He distributed it using public distribution methods with no copy protection. (bboards/shareware) 3. He published the format allowing ANYONE to implement the decoding/encoding if they should desire. 4. People were thus able to make UNIX versions to unstuff files at will. MPW tools to do unstuffing appeared. Communications programs could unstuff files on the fly. Now Alladin is attempting to set a NEW STANDARD. One that has the SAME BASIC NAME, and similar functionality. The CRITICAL DIFFERENCE is that the FORMAT of the compressed file is PROPRIETARY. So point 3 above (Public Format) is being removed. Thus: 1. Other implementors will be unable to implement algorithms to encode/decode the new format. 2. Noone will be able to write better programs to create new format stuffit files, except people Alladin feels (in its own business interest) may do so. 3. Everybody PAYS ALLADIN for the right to create archives. Example: How many years did ADOBE withhold the secret to TYPE 1 FONTS in postscript from other type companies, leading to a monopoly on good output at small-sized low-resolution for that company. Developers could make Type 3 fonts - but I'm sure they would have preferred to be equal players in the font arena. In article <1990Sep2.185740.2049@svc.portal.com> leonardr@svc.portal.com (Leonard Rosenthol) writes: > Both Stuffit Deluxe and Stuffit Classic will allow you to CREATE, >MODIFY, or simply UNSTUFF 1.5.1 archives. They are not abandoning the format, >since it is the history of the product and at this time is the 'industry >standard' for public archives. You will always be able to create and work >with 1.5.1 archives, but you will also get better compression methods, and >heirarchical archives at a shareware level - not to mention being able to >work with the Deluxe archives that you might encounter. >Leonard Rosenthol >Software Ventures Corp. >MicroPhone II Development Team Alladin is IN EFFECT abandoning the old format. 1. They have created a new format, and have created software that uses as its primary format a new format. 2. They have named the new publicly-distributed version of their program STUFFIT CLASSIC. But just as Coca-Cola changed the formula for Coke Classic, Stuffit Classic will (presumably) default to the a NEW FORMAT for data storage. 3. People will likely make both kinds of files, and upload them to bboards - proliferating the new format furthur. 4. Other developers won't be able to write a general purpose tool to deal with the both formats, so people will have to use what Alladin gives. Advantage: Alladin. It is by this logic that I conclude that Alladin is in effect creating a new proprietary standard for Macintosh data compression/archiving. My primary goal is to make sure that public archives are stored in a public format that developers may freely implement software to manipulate any way they choose, and without interference from any company. This could be achieved in a number of ways: 1. Alladin could make their format public. Allowing it to continue as a public compression/archiving standard. 2. Some other competing designer could declare their format as a possible new standard and make it public. They could convert old format files to their new public format, allowing people to gradually shift to their now public, and allow other developers to decode their format. 3. Some combination of interested people could create a new standard, and write tools to support it. Leonard, that is my current analysis of the situation. I welcome your/Alladin's public response the the issues raised. I also encourage others to share their views. You can make a difference. -- 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