🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <SCT.93Jan18171235@barley.dcs.ed.ac.uk> sct@dcs.ed.ac.uk (Stephen Tweedie) writes:
>From: sct@dcs.ed.ac.uk (Stephen Tweedie)
>Subject: Re: Comparison of ARJ 2.3 and PKZip 2.04 and 1.1 (Was: pkzip 2.04c uploaded to w)
>Date: 18 Jan 93 17:12:35 GMT

>> francis@ac.dal.ca writes:
>> Well, here are the results of my preliminary test of PKZip 2.04c and 
>> how it compares to ARJ 2.3 and PKZip 1.10.

>> ...

>> Also note that PKZip 2.04 on the -en "normal" mode STILL gets better 
>> compression than ARJ -m1 and does so in two-thirds the time.

>OK, but for fair comparison, shouldn't you be using the BEST
>compression option for arj?

No.  -en is not the BEST compression of pkzip, -ex is.  -en is the middle 
level.

>ARJ -jm1 is better that ARJ -m1 (at least on my copy of arj, which is
>over two years old).  I have a 486/33, so the (significantly) greater
>compression times for ARJ are still tolerable; the better compression
>(with -jm1) and the multiple volume and auto-verify options make ARJ a
>winner.

Depends on who you are.  I frequently compress files of 25 to 40 MB, and 
time is money.

>Mind you, I haven't tested PKZip 2.04c yet, so I don't know whether or
>not ARJ -jm1 will actually win.  But it's worth trying, at least.

It doesn't.

 -----------Visit the SOUNDING BOARD BBS 214-596-2915, a Wildcat! BBS--------
 ObQuotes:
 "Quick to judge, quick to anger, slow to understand..."
 "Ignorance and prejudice, and fear go hand-in-hand..."

    Patrick Taylor, Ericsson Network Systems
    exuptr@exu.ericsson.se                    "Don't let the .se fool you"