Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!rutgers!sri-spam!mordor!lll-tis!ptsfa!ihnp4!homxb!whuts!tes
From: tes@whuts.UUCP (STERKEL)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: standards is standards Re: SQUASHED!
Message-ID: <2290@whuts.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 2-Jul-87 08:59:00 EDT
Article-I.D.: whuts.2290
Posted: Thu Jul  2 08:59:00 1987
Date-Received: Sat, 4-Jul-87 08:46:35 EDT
References: <642@cgh.UUCP> <10710@clyde.ATT.COM>
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Lines: 30
Keywords: ARC, PKARC, squashed, STANDARDS
Summary: tacky misuse of standard

In article <10710@clyde.ATT.COM>, feg@clyde.UUCP writes:
> 
> Why all this refusal to accept improvements and innovation? 
....
> Come on guys, get with it!!
> 
> Forrest Gehrke
 
I use PK*.* for the speed, but immediately applied the 
patches to prevent my EVER inadvertently creating a
non-standard *.ARC.  To do otherwise is to demonstrate
a callous disregard for others who may not have the
latest and greatest Phil Katz concept of how to compress.

Incidentally, is it not a bit tacky to rip-off another
person's standard, change it to be incompatible with the
original, refuse to ensure (through extensions--whatever)
that no one ever gets burned in the confusion, and *declare*
your standard is the only good version?

(Thought I would ask; techies seem to be somewhat loosely
connected on business ethics and standards issues when
faced with Newer, Bigger, Faster, Smaller:-) 
elses


-- 
                         Terry Sterkel
        {clyde|harvard|cbosgd|allegra|ulysses|ihnp4}!whuts!tes
              [opinions are obviously only my own]