Article View: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Article #26664Comparison of compaction routines
From: Chuck Brunow
Date: Sun, 24 Apr 1988 05:13
Date: Sun, 24 Apr 1988 05:13
23 lines
1459 bytes
1459 bytes
The tester of the various routines for compaction titled as ... > TEST OF MS-DOS COMPRESSION PROGRAMS > > Release 1.0 > > Tests performed 4-21-88 by Erik Talvola > > Article Copyright 1988 by Erik Talvola provided a cursory look at programs by name. It would be well to specify what the method of compaction used in each case was. Setting that aside, the author misses the principle point of compaction: to make it small. Speed is not a good measure of this function except as it relates to transmission speed, ie. how small is it. The 16-bit compress clearly blew everything else away in overall terms. Further, because the routines of compress are widely available, and Unix compatible, that method can be integrated into a program specially suited to the task at hand, and need not burden the user with a archiver (unpacking yet another layer is BS). The authors clear bias toward bells and whistles blinds him to the real point.
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<483@csccat.UUCP>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!mnetor!uunet!lll-winken!lll-tis!ames!killer!csccat!lociShow Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!mnetor!uunet!lll-winken!lll-tis!ames!killer!csccat!loci From: loci@csccat.UUCP (Chuck Brunow) Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc Subject: Comparison of compaction routines Message-ID: <483@csccat.UUCP> Date: 24 Apr 88 05:13:35 GMT Followup-To: TEST OF MS-DOS COMPRESSION PROGRAMS Organization: Computer Support Corporation. Dallas,Texas Lines: 22 Keywords: good data, bad (biased) conclusion