Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!gatech!mcdchg!falkor!heiby
From: heiby@falkor.UUCP (Ron Heiby)
Newsgroups: comp.binaries.ibm.pc.d
Subject: Re: zoo vs. arc
Message-ID: <186@falkor.UUCP>
Date: 1 Jun 89 04:43:06 GMT
References: <1793@dogie.macc.wisc.edu>
Reply-To: heiby@chg.mcd.mot.com (Ron Heiby)
Organization: Luck Dragons, Magic, & Friends
Lines: 21

The big advantages are:
	A)  Portable software that is proven to run on several
		different machines and O.S.s.
	B)  Source code available.
	C)  Extremely generous license to use.
	D)  No payment requested or expected.
	E)  No major political/legal battles.

It may very well be that some whiz-bang archiver has a faster implementation
and/or compresses more.  If someone wants to use that on their machine, more
power to them.  The use of "zoo" format for distribution makes a lot of
sense.  Some people like to take a look at distributions on their host.
Some people like to use the shared laser printer to print documentation.
Having *a* standard format, with the tools readily available to all on
(almost) their choice of system can only be a big *win* for everybody
concerned.

BTW, Where were you when this was discussed to death a couple of months ago?
-- 
Ron Heiby, heiby@chg.mcd.mot.com	Moderator: comp.newprod
"Life is indeed an inexplicable sequence of imponderable surprises."