Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!husc6!rutgers!paul.rutgers.edu!wacey
From: wacey@paul.rutgers.edu ( )
Newsgroups: comp.binaries.ibm.pc.d
Subject: Re: PK361.EXE
Message-ID: 
Date: 16 Aug 88 15:01:37 GMT
References: <3656@bsu-cs.UUCP>
Reply-To: wacey@paul.rutgers.edu ( )
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.
Lines: 16


It's amazing how hysterical some people become. In the case of
ARC and PKARC , PKARC was almost an exact duplicate of ARC.
This would be comparable to someone wriing a 123 clone that was
split into two parts, was faster and caused incompatiblities 
with files ending in WKS.
I wonder how many people who are screaming that PKARC got raked
actual write commercial software. If you spent one or two years
on R+D, building a cutomer base and support only to have someone
duplicate your product how would you feel. If the author of PKARC
just wanted a faster ARC he should have talked to SEA about having
them release it.
It is alot easier to duplicate a program than to think it up in
the first place.

iain wacey