🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <4564@ut-ngp.UUCP> dlnash@ut-ngp.UUCP (Donald L. Nash) writes:
>PKXARC may be faster than ARC, but it only extracts files from archives. 
>A separate program, PKARC, is needed to create archives.  I find this to
>be a real bother, especially since ARC does both.

How much more of a bother is it to type

	pkxarc blorch.arc ...

then to type

	arc x blorch.arc ...

I mean, really!  Not all of us are so lucky as to be using the
yuppiest new 386 machines that make even the slowest software acceptably
fast.  I found ARC to be so slow on my total-garbage-el-stinko 4.77 Mhz
PC as to be unusable.  In contrast, the Phil Katz programs are so fast
as to make any minor inconveniences in command syntax irrelevant.  And
on the 386, PK{X}ARC is incredible. If you can't stand the syntax, use
little batch files to hide it.

>I think that in the future, we may see people using ARC on mainframes of
>various flavors and using PKARC on PCs. 

Agreed.  I only use ARC on the VAX, where it's about as fast as PK{X}ARC
on a PC.
-- 
Mark Alexander	...{hplabs,ucbvax!decvax}!decwrl!pyramid!amdahl!drivax!alexande
"This then is my story.  I have reread it.  It has bits of marrow
sticking to it, and blood, and beautiful bright-green flies."  --Nabokov