Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!seismo!sundc!pitstop!sun!imagen!atari!portal!cup.portal.com!raf From: raf@cup.portal.com Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc Subject: Re: Wake up and smell the coffee Message-ID: <9685@cup.portal.com> Date: 3 Oct 88 19:50:39 GMT References: <4574232@ <16800358@clio> <925@psu-cs.UUCP> <1988Sep Organization: The Portal System (TM) Lines: 100 XPortal-User-Id: 1.1001.2659 From: raf@cup.portal.com (Bob Freed) Just when you thought everything that *can* be said *has* been said... In article <439@l5comp.UUCP> scotty@l5comp.UUCP (Scott Turner) writes: >[The author kindly asks that if you wish to flame him in public that you >at least read the last few paragraphs of this message before doing so.] [...followed by 304 more lines of mostly nonsensical ranting.] That flame invitation is a real temptation... [10,000 groans of dismay from net readers worldwide...] ...but most of this belongs in alt.flame, and I won't add to the noise in comp.sys.ibm.pc by debating every point. [...10,000 sighs of relief!] However, there are a few statements about which I would like to comment. [Uh, oh...] I'll try to be brief (relative to the referenced article). [Whew! :-)] >...big problem has been one Keith Peterson. I find this *extremely* objectionable. Keith has for many years been a significant contributor to public domain software distribution in general and to the network community in particular. He's left little doubt as to his sympathies in the matter of SEA vs. PKware, but his postings have always been informative and factual. You may not agree with Keith, but he certainly does not deserve to be categorized in this manner for expressing his views (which are shared by many who are less influential). >...about the recent 2nd lawsuit filed by SEA: >...may yet get one Phil Katz thrown in jail. The second complaint was not a lawsuit, and these are CIVIL not CRIMINAL actions. That you believe Phil Katz might face imprisonment reduces your credibility in legal matters sufficiently to allow us to dispense with at least the next 15 paragraphs of your article. >In fact, if I remember correctly, people had to clobber Phil over the >head to get him to tell the world what the SQUASHED file format was. This is a fallacy. The facts have been posted to USENET several times (most recently by Keith Petersen), but since the PK bashers continue to propogate this type of misinformation, the facts bear repeating: Shortly after the release of PKARC 2.0 (the version that introduced Squashing) in mid-December 1986 [yes, it was that long ago!], Katz released a document (SQSHINFO.DOC) describing his "new" compression method. It was actually just a very minor variation of the existing Lempel-Ziv-Welch compression (Crunching) used by ARC, but one which yielded measurable savings in space and time for large compressable files. The public information which Katz provided was sufficient to allow (trivial) modification to existing archive extractors for support of PKARC-generated files. I can speak with some authority on this topic... >There are no VMS/Unix/Atari ST/Commodore C64/CPM/Amiga PKARC programs >folks. ^^^ ...as I am the author of the predominant .ARC file extraction program, UNARC, for CP/M systems. UNARC is coded in Z80 assembly language, and it took me all of two hours' time to make the necessary modifications to support Squashing. Within a few days after the appearance of PKARC 2.0, a compatible version of UNARC was in the hands of remote access CP/M sysops across the North American continent. It has always amazed me that Squashing became such an issue for the MS-DOS and UNIX communities, when it was never one for us "lowly" CP/M users. (Had I had ready access to a *NIX machine at the time, the net would have also had a Squashing version of ARC much sooner. Any competent C programmer could have done as much in an afternoon or two.) Incidentally, the name "UNARC" was my own invention. At the time I released the first version (May 1986), this term was *not* in common usage anywhere, and I researched it quite thoroughly. [The program was to be called "DEARC" until I discovered a Pascal program of that name by another author.] So I was mildly annoyed to see SEA Inc. claiming sole rights to this terminology. Certainly, there was no mention of trademark rights by ARC author Thom Henderson back in 1986, in his reply to a letter from me. Which leads me to one other myth about SEA... >Just look at it from SEA's viewpoint for a moment, you've created the industry >standard and fostered it's growth across a BROAD range of computers. SEA has never fostered anything but its own growth among MS-DOS computer users. More than two years ago, I was bluntly told by Thom Henderson: "We don't support CP/M" (a direct quote). From a practical financial standpoint, I can't blame him one bit, but let's not attribute to SEA any altruistic inclinations toward the "BROAD range of computer users." With regard to practicality (entrepreneurship?), it has been argued that Phil Katz is no different than Thom Henderson. But I've had conversations with Phil, and he has shown a genuine concern for the usefulness and portability of his products in non-DOS environments. (PKware *does* offer a shareware archive extractor for AmigaDOS, and a VAX/VMS version was in the works before SEA's attorney came knocking.) I sincerely believe we have a better chance with PKware for a UNIVERSAL, WELL-SUPPORTED, and TECHNOLOGICALLY-ADVANCED compressing-archiver system. Bob Freed raf@cup.portal.com Newton Centre, MA ...sun!portal!cup.portal.com!raf "Next thing you know, we'll have to pay license fees for using inverse trigonometric functions!"