🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1562@sics.se> roland@sics.se (Roland Karlsson) writes:
>Oh no!
>
>Not yet an other way of distributing mac files.
>
>I am unfourtainly forced to download StuffIt. Some person (Thats the most
>positive word I can think of) may use this NEW PackIt format. Please don't.
>
>StuffIt may be better than PackIt. It may save some bytes on the net. But
>it is not worth it! I (and probably you) already have a working solution how
>to download with PackIt ( Using PackIt (on MAC), unpit (on UNIX), etc. ).
>
>-----
>
>Please Tony Jacobs tell the net NOT to use your maybe very good program.
>
>In spite of the first lines I don't want to offend you. I just don't
>want to have one more way to download programs.
>
>	Roland Karlsson

You obviously haven't used or even looked at the program yet! First of all it
is not my program, I wish it was, I would make some good bucks off it.  I am
quite sure it WILL become the new standard.  Packit was better than nothing,
just barely! If you would at least look you would notice that you can still
un pack Packit files with Stuffit.

Stuffit doesn't just save a few bytes, it can save TONS of them little buggers.
I have seen files that packed twice as small as Packit. When you add up all the
traffic that comes across the net, it will make a big difference. Stuffit is
zillions of times more friendly when dealing with lots of small files. You can
also unpack Packit files directly into Stuffit archives.

The only reasons I can think of why switching to Stuffit would cause problems
is for those folks who don't have Stuffit yet, and for those very few who use
the password and encryption features of Packit.  And of couse there are those
out there who like it in their rut and don't like anything new and improved.

Stuffit is free for downloading, only $15 for archiving.  The cat is out of the
bag and I doubt I could stop its spread if I wanted to.

Tony Jacobs
Center for Engineering Design
University of Utah