#PKPAK ?
21 messages in this thread
Hi,
I was wondering if there is a version of PKPAK for the AMIGA. I remember
downloading un UNPAKer that indicated a full version for the AMIGA was in the
works. I've been poking around in the Libraries but haven't found it yet.
Aloha,
Dan
Dan,
It hasn't appeared yet.
Don
Don,
OK, thought I was missing something !
Aloha,
Dan
To expand on Don's comment, there is a strong possibility you will never see
PKPAK. Phil stated that there "wasn't enough money" in an Amiga version about
a year ago. Some people program for the love of the machine. Others do it for
commercial reasons. Katz apparently falls in the latter category.
Rick
To expand on Richard's comment, given the fact that SEA won their lawsuit
against Phil, there is about a 100% chance there will never be another PKPAK on
any machine…
To expand on Dave's expansion on my expansion on Don's comment… 8)… it's a
shame, too. PKPAK was a speed demon!
Rick
Dave,
Not quite true. What SEA won was for Katz to stop using the words 'ARC'
and 'Archive', among other things. Since the settlement, SEA has taken Katz to
court again on breach of contract (breach of settlement?) and lost. I don't
remember all the details but the whole story (including the legal documents
filed) is available for downloading in the IBM forums.
-sja
Steve,
My understanding was that Phil was (as of January, 1989) nolonger allowed
to distribute ANY utilie which processed standard 'ARC'-type files, regardless
of the name. I had heard about the breach of contract suit, but assumed Phil
won because the January deadline had not yet expired. Guess I'll have to head
over to the IBM sections and do a little more research.
– Dave
Rick,
Thanks for the info. What does everyone else use for arcing on the AMIGA ? I
ship everything to the IBM side of my 2000 and use ARC.
Aloha,
Dan
Dan,
We use ARC (in LIB 4 as ARC.EXE) and it works across machines. It's
not compatible with PKARC thou so you'd have to move the files before using
PKARC from one side to the other and then use PKARC.
I've found very few files that I needed to use PKARC on from the MS-DOS
side, most of them are 'normal' ARC files and the Amiga version works fine.
Also works fine with the ST version and the UNIX version of ARC.
Don
Don,
Thanks, I think I saw ARC while rooting through the libraries.
Aloha,
Dan
Dan,
Lib4, ARC.EXE.
Betty
Dan,
We ship everything to the Amiga side and use ARC. 🙂
Seriously, ARC.EXE is in LIB 4, and there is a help file called ARC.HLP in
LIB 1. It is fuly compatible with ARC on the IBM (and other machines).
-larry
Larry,
I'd do everything from the AMIGA side if I could afford the peripherals etc.
I will get ARC from the library – too bad about PKPAK though I liked the self
extracting achive feature.
Aloha,
Dan
Dan,
That Bridge card was more than most hard drive systems. 🙂
-larry
Another problem is that Katz was asking $25 as shareware payment. Well, to me,
PKAX isn't worth $25 — $10, maybe.
When a superb program like Access! is going for $25 (and worth twice that,
IMHO) there's no way I could justify sending $25 for a faster unARCer. So, I
don't use PKAX.
-sja
Oh, *I* use it, and make no bones about it. When a shareware author makes a
good product I find useful and asks a fair price (you know who you are!), I
send them a check. Sometimes for more than they are asking. But when a
shareware author produces a marginal program that is fragile or crashes often
(I tried AnalytiCalc; it's incredibly powerful (you can even do FFTs with the
darned thing), but crashed on a regular basis AND lost data without warning; I
erased the disk), has an attitude problem ("Send me $30 or you will fry in H*LL
because I spent six months of my life on this program and if you don't pay me
you are scum…"; I actually have one of these!), or asks for a figure which in
my opinion far exceeds the worth of the product (PKAX), they get nada from me.
In the same way that I've walked away from an obnoxious car salesman even
though he has EXACTLY what I want on the lot. I go buy it elsewhere.
Katz falls into the latter TWO categories for me. He struck me as coming off
as more interested in making money than supporting the machine. Sorry, I don't
need that. PKAX is a good program, but it's not worth $25, not by a long shot.
Rick
I treat shareware just like any other product. If I like it, I'll buy it. If I
like it but consider the price too high, I won't buy it and won't use it. The
same logic applies to shareware as to anything else. Just because you can't
afford something or believe it is priced above it's worth does not mean you are
justified in stealing it. PKAX is nice, not worth $25, and I don't use it.
<Shrug> Then we'll have to agree to disagree on this one. I absolutely agree
that considering a price too high does not give someone a right to steal. I'm
dead-set against piracy, and have never owned a stolen piece of commercial
software in my computing lifetime.
Shareware, to my mind, is a moral trust and agreement between two people. As
provider, you trust the consumers to be fair with you. As
consumer, I have a decision to make about the software and its worth to me.
The simple fact is that, to me, PKAX is not a significant enough product to
rate a shareware contribution, especially not $25. But does this require the
user to never use the product? I don't think so. It's up to each of us to
make these decisions, and I've made mine. Products that greatly improve my
productivity, make my life easier or nicer, and/or are superbly done garner my
money (Access!, Uedit, ConMan, and BlitzFonts are among these). Rehashes like
PKAX that have only one thing going for them (speed, in this case) and other
things against them (no ARC capabilities) don't. I'm truly sorry if you find
that offensive (that's sincere, and I don't blame you if you find my feelings
distasteful; morals are heady stuff), but that's my outlook for today, and I
can't change.
Still friends?
Rick
I disagree. If you use a shareware product, you should pay for it. Using it
and refusing to pay for it for whatever reason is less than honest and is the
reason why (with very few exceptions) the shareware concept is not working.
As I said, we won't come to terms on this one, as our outlooks are somewhat
different. I respect you for your viewpoint. It just isn't mine.
Rick