🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1991May28.151436.383@ulkyvx.bitnet> pclank01@ulkyvx.bitnet (Pat Lankswert) writes:
%In article <1991May23.231547.6948@cbnewse.att.com>, langev@cbnewse.att.com (steve.j.langevin) writes:
%> Anyone have any opinions on any of the disk compression programs
%> (stacker, etc) that are starting to show up on the market?
%
%For the record, let it be known that I am against these devices...
%but that is just my opinion.
%
%> Do they work without causing any problems?
%
%They are capricious at best.  Someone in our building has the hardware version
%of STACKER running on one machine and the software version running on several.

I have been running with an Expanz compression board on my machine since 
November and have had no trouble with it, other than what may be a slight
compatibility problem with Geoworks Ensemble.  (I haven't yet determined the
cause of the problem -- it may or may not have to do with the Expanz board.)

I have used Windows 3.0 (demo version), Quattro 2.0, Paradox 3.0, Power C,
Timeworks' Publish It!, and several shareware pgms without any difficulty.
The makers of the Expanz board recommend that you don't use a de-fragmentation
utility (or presumably, any other disk-fixer) on a compressed disk, but that's
about it.

%
%>  How do they affect the "speed" of your systems?

Definitely slower with the Expanz board.  Not so slow that I'm annoyed by it,
but, hey, I'm used to programming on a mainframe using a dumb terminal :-).

I think the Expanz board is an OK product.  In exchange for slightly slower
disk access, I get 30 megs on my hard drive instead of 20 megs.  (BTW, don't
believe their claims of "up to 6:1 compression ratio".  I average about 1.5:1).

Hope this helps.



-- 
   Doug Taylor                         |   Nothing real can be threatened.
   The Ohio State University           |   Nothing unreal exists.
   doug_taylor@osu.edu                 |            - A Course in Miracles