farren@hoptoad.UUCP (04/10/87)
This will be the last thing I post about this controversy. My mind is made up; the only thing left to do is to let you know my thinking, so you can make up your own minds. First, I reiterate my previous posting: by my tests, ARCing files first, then uuencoding them, results in substantial losses in efficiency when compress is used in news transmission. Therefore, I recommend posting the simple uuencoded binaries, perhaps shared with other files, in lieu of posting uuencoded ARC files. Second, I received a lot of comments to the effect of: yes, but all sites do not use compress. This is true, but in those cases, the site has made its own choice as to the tradeoff between communications time/costs and CPU time/costs. They are free to change their minds at any time. If they do not, then one must presume that they are aware of the cost; that they are willing to assume the costs in money and time of transmitting larger files than is strictly necessary. The argument also cuts the other way: by ARCing files, you are increasing the costs of all of the sites that DO compress news (a majority, I believe). I am convinced (and I don't change my mind easily, believe me!) that my old stance, that files should be ARCed, is wrong. I will personally act on this; you are free to do as you will. -- ---------------- "... if the church put in half the time on covetousness Mike Farren that it does on lust, this would be a better world ..." hoptoad!farren Garrison Keillor, "Lake Wobegon Days"