[comp.sys.ibm.pc] compatibility was: GSARC - non-compatible more efficient archiver

mac3n@babbage.acc.virginia.edu (Alex Colvin) (10/25/88)

In article <1334@micomvax.UUCP>, ray@micomvax.UUCP (Ray Dunn) writes:
> >    [GSARC]             ....are we to resist this just because it's
> >incompatible - even though it is a significant step forward in
> >compression efficiency?

> To answer the question - yes, unless you want to perpetuate the state of
> non-standardisation.

If we weren't so tied up in backward compatibility, we wouldn't be reading
news about these @#!& i4004 clones.