Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!tektronix!reed!psu-cs!alexc From: alexc@psu-cs.UUCP (Alex Chan) Newsgroups: comp.binaries.ibm.pc.d Subject: Re: ARC/ZOO/ZIP for comp.binaries.ibm.pc Message-ID: <1707@psu-cs.UUCP> Date: 1 Mar 89 00:29:53 GMT References: <1325@csm9a.UUCP> Reply-To: alexc@psu-cs.UUCP (Alex Chan) Organization: Dept. of Computer Science, Portland State University; Portland OR Lines: 55 In article <1325@csm9a.UUCP> japplega@csm9a.UUCP (Joe Applegate) writes: >In article , w8sdz@WSMR-SIMTEL20.ARMY.MIL (Keith Petersen) writes: >> Now is not a good time to switch from ARC to ZOO. Many BBSs around >> the country are switching their entire on-line file archives to ZIP >> archives. Reports I have seen indicate a savings of FIVE MEGABYTES on >> a typical 40 mb hard disk BBS. >> >> Anything we can do to lessen the network load is worthwhile. It's >> just a matter of time before someone writes a ZIP archiver for Unix. > > >Amazing... whose code will PK pirate for PKZIP... >and whose compression format will he steal and market as his own???? > >We need another compression "standard" like we need a hole in the head!!! > >I am seriously considering adding a statement to all my products to restrict >their archiving with any PK product... I already refuse to make available any >downloads to my BBS that are not in ARC or ZOO format... make that REAL ARC >format! > >The decision of whether to embrace one format or another based on availability >of processing tools on UNIX is rediculous! DOS programs should be processed >with DOS tools... the idea of unarcing a program on Unix and then transmitting >multiple files at 30-50% the size when the .ARC file is available is >not pratical... we have excellant tools for DOS... not only is ARC available >for DOS but ZOO as well... and SIMTEL20 and many BBS' even carry Unix-style >tools such as uudecode/uuencode, tar, ar, and even compress... > >Let's let posters use what ever format they want and let the reciever use >the available DOS tools to process it. Yes, I suppose even ZIP... though >personally PKWARE has caused so much grief with the adaption of a standard >extension for a non-standard non-compatible product that I feel they ought >to be black-listed amongst the PC user community! > > - Joe Applegate - > > ======================STANDARD DISCLAIMER============================ > All views and opinions are my own and do not represent the views or > opinions of the Colorado School of Mines, whatever they might be. > ===================================================================== I think that Joe Applegate should not openly post article to "flame" others effort to come up with suggestions and should not put down PKWARE's product. If someone have make a mistake in the past, it does not mean that they are in fault forever or in someone's black-list. This is USA and nobody is in fault unless proven guity..... Alex M. Chan AMC Microsystems Inc. ( Private research and developement ) UUCP: uunet!tektronix!{psu-cs,reed,ogccse}!qiclab!tanya!root DISCLAIMER : The above stated is only my personal opinion, in no way it represent my employer or my organization.... *** ALL FlAMES > /dev/null ***