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