Xref: utzoo comp.sys.ibm.pc:12363 comp.unix.xenix:1559
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!lll-winken!lll-lcc!ames!ll-xn!husc6!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!mdf
From: mdf@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu (Mark D. Freeman)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc,comp.unix.xenix
Subject: Re: PKARC
Message-ID: <7186@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu>
Date: 25 Feb 88 05:36:33 GMT
References: <4671@ozdaltx.UUCP>
Reply-To: mdf@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu.UUCP (Mark D. Freeman)
Organization: StrongPoint Systems, Inc.; Columbus, OH. (guest of Ohio State U.)
Lines: 27

In <4671@ozdaltx.UUCP> root@ozdaltx.UUCP (Scotty) writes:
>If you are using PKARC, you might give some serious
>consideration to going back to the Standard ARC.  I talked
>with Thom Henderson today of S E A who authored ARC and they
>are getting complaints about PKARC not being system
>compatable (backwards) with ARC.  

Only if you use one of their new compression modes.  You can turn this
mode off.  This incompatibility can be turned on and off at will.

>PKARC is in violation of S E A's copywrite.  

No it isn't.

>The *occasional*  1-3% savings in compression is hardly
>worth the problems caused by incompability.

I don't use it for better compression, I use it because it is AMAZINGLY
faster than arc.  On the order of 2-3 times faster.




-- 
Mark D. Freeman						  (614) 262-1418
					      mdf@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu
2440 Medary Avenue	   ...!cbosgd!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!mdf
Columbus, OH  43202-3014      Guest account at The Ohio State University