Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rpi!mts.rpi.edu!Garance_Drosehn
From: Garance_Drosehn@mts.rpi.edu (Garance Drosehn)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.apps
Subject: Re: Which format to use? (Was: StuffIt, etc.)
Message-ID: <1'S^D=*@rpi.edu>
Date: 31 Dec 90 19:53:16 GMT
References: <5181@husc6.harvard.edu>
Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Inst.
Lines: 17
Nntp-Posting-Host: gilead.its.rpi.edu

In article <5181@husc6.harvard.edu> 
           kenh@hscfsas1.harvard.edu (Ken Hancock) writes:
> What no one has mentioned so far, is that anyone who sends anything to
> sumex-aim, whether it be Compactor, StuffIt, or StuffIt Deluxe, is
> that they're expected to have paid the shareware fees to use the
> compression.  If someone has shelled out the $20 bucks (or whatever)
> for Compactor, why make them pay for StuffIt?

Well, I don't know if I mentioned it explicitly, but this is certainly one 
of the reasons that using Stuffit 1.5.1 makes more sense.  It's been 
around for a long time, and a load of people have *already* paid for 
stuffit.  Not only that, but some of the other compaction programs know 
what to do with stuffit 1.5.1 files, so even if you have not paid for 
Stuffit then you still may have paid for something else which can handle 
Stuffit 1.5.1 files.

Garance_Drosehn@mts.rpi.edu