Author: Lonnie Cook
Date: 21:13:47 11/06/00
Go up one level in this thread
On November 06, 2000 at 12:15:02, Tim Mirabile wrote: >It has been suggested that by using the CAB format instead of the ZIP format, >compression ratios for the monthly archives could be greatly improved, resulting >in file sizes about 1/3 of what they are now. This is probably since ZIP only >compresses the individual files and not across multiple files, so it is not the >best way to compress lots of small text files. > >Windows users have several means to extract CAB files, but I am concerned that >people using other platforms would have problems with this format. If the CAB >format is not universal enough, I would consider other compression formats which >compress across multiple files. Any ideas or suggestions? here I did some compression comparisons and u can c : m1999.11.zip 4,264,732 original archive file testing.cab 1,400,426 testing.rar 1,535,789 Testing.ace 1,700,271 test2.tar.bz2 2,565,178 test1.tar.gz 3,042,154 testing.lzh 4,025,354 test.bh 4,063,632 testing.jar 4,272,214 test.tar 11,120,640 test2.tar 11,120,640 CAB is quite good on compression with RAR & ACE following closely behind BUT I stated in this thread WinRAR 2.71 supports other O/S besides winDOZES
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.