Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!iuvax!maytag!water!ljdickey
From: ljdickey@water.waterloo.edu (L.J.Dickey)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.atari.st
Subject: Re: LHARC source and UNIX
Keywords: No source, no like.
Message-ID: <2873@water.waterloo.edu>
Date: 26 Dec 89 04:46:25 GMT
References: <51989@ccicpg.UUCP>
Reply-To: ljdickey@water.waterloo.edu (L.J.Dickey)
Organization: U. of Waterloo, Ontario
Lines: 33

In article <51989@ccicpg.UUCP> paulm@ccicpg.UUCP (Paul Moreau ) writes:
>Well it seems that the LHARC is going to take over the atari archiving
>world.

Don't jump to conclusions Paul.  This does not seem too likely to me.
I tried that program on a file that was posted a couple of months ago.
It was a disaster.

 >           I for one use a UNIX system for posting and recieving news
 > and binaries.   I uudecode, and unarc on the unix system and examine
 > the stuff before going through the expense of going home,
 > making a ... call to work and download the stuff.

I agree and sympathize with the writer here.  I do much the same thing.

However, I would insist that a program be significantly better before
we switch to it.  It takes a lot of effort to bring a large body of
users on line to the use of new software.  Readers may recall that
I asked about ZOO and whether or not it was really better.  I am convinced.
It does offer significant improvement over ARC, and now use both ZOO
(and ARC) on three systems.  

Now, I ask, can anyone speak up for LHARC ?  Is it really any better 
than ARC ?   I can testify that it is harder to use!  I doubt if
it is better than ZOO.  If I am right about this, perhaps we should
just let it lie in peace.


-- 
    L. J. Dickey, Faculty of Mathematics, University of Waterloo.
	ljdickey@water.UWaterloo.ca	ljdickey@water.BITNET
	ljdickey@water.UUCP		..!uunet!watmath!water!ljdickey
	ljdickey@water.waterloo.edu