Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!samsung!uunet!convex!rosenkra From: rosenkra@convex.com (William Rosencranz) Newsgroups: comp.sys.atari.st Subject: Re: lharc woes Message-ID: <1991Jun25.203405.16211@convex.com> Date: 25 Jun 91 20:34:05 GMT References: <1991Jun19.012653.8005@convex.com> <1991Jun20.120942.28747@cs.nott.ac.uk> Sender: usenet@convex.com (news access account) Distribution: comp Organization: CONVEX Computer Corporation, Richardson, Tx., USA Lines: 31 Nntp-Posting-Host: convex1.convex.com In article ue@nathan.ruhr.de writes: >Hi, >what about giving STZip a try? Ok, it's still called a beta version, but >it works, its faster than LHarc, and the compression rate is alomost the >same as LHarc's... >The actual version is 0.9beta... ONLY, repeat ONLY iff 1) there is full source for ST, Unix, VMS, and whatever, 2) ONLY (again) if there is only ONE, repeat, ONE version, fully controlled by ONE group (not 10+ like lharc), 3) ONLY if it is so much better than zoo (2.01 or 2.10 or the new, soon to be released version) that it is much faster (both compression and decompression), much easier to use (command line interface, arguably zoo's single weakness, with hooks to add it to arcgsh et al for those prefering GEM), much better compression, much more feature laden, but not so much as to get in the way, etc. please do NOT start posting archives in this format. i would propose a vote (here?), preceded by extensive testing (on ALL platforms) before this happens. and i am reluctant to use anything labeled "beta" for archival. beta s/w should be used by beta testers, NOT the entire community. [ note that my initial reaction, of course, was "SHEESH! ANOTHER ARCHIVER FORMAT TO DEAL WITH" but i calmed down... :-) ] -bill rosenkra@convex.com -- Bill Rosenkranz |UUCP: {uunet,texsun}!convex!c1yankee!rosenkra Convex Computer Corp. |ARPA: rosenkra%c1yankee@convex.com