SAC.DYESGPF@E.ISI.EDU (09/15/88)
Keith, please pass this along to anyone else you thik may be interessed. Having worked with CDOS and an ARC program back in late 1982, I was very suprised by the the decision in the SEA vs PK software case. I totally agree with replacing all the SEA format archives with something else. My question concerns ZOO vs PKpak/unpak. Doesn't the newest PK compression usually result in a smaller achive file than ZOO? Are there any paticular advantages to ZOO that I previously missed? If I remember correctly the PK software is faster and gives a smaller file for the normal mix of documentation, source code and executables, but I may be wrong. It may be that the only reason I started using PK software was that it has been SEA ARC compatable, which would make my preference rather a mute point. Of course, if all the main-frame archives switch to a PK format, that would lend "moral-support" to PK which will really get the folks at SEA steamed (I hope). Which ever way this goes, I am all for using the most effective compression program available in the public/shareware domaine. Al Holecek These are my own opions and are not intended to reflect the position of the United States Air Force or the Department of Defense, etc., etc., etc., etc., et