Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!wuarchive!brutus.cs.uiuc.edu!gem.mps.ohio-state.edu!ginosko!uunet!cs.dal.ca!dal1!mdinn From: mdinn@ac.dal.ca Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga Subject: Re: zip vs. other archivers Message-ID: <813@ac.dal.ca> Date: 12 Oct 89 09:26:07 GMT References: Lines: 17 Organisation: Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada In article , portuesi@tweezers.esd.sgi.com (Michael Portuesi) writes: > > It seems the Amiga world is inundated with the various archiving and > compression schemes from both the Unix and MS-DOS worlds (shar, > uuencode, tar, arc, zoo, and zip) plus Amiga-specific archivers such > as warp and pak. Do we really need this many archive formats? > \/ Michael Portuesi Silicon Graphics Computer Systems, Inc. > portuesi@SGI.COM Personally, I find that the best compression/speed ratio I get is from LHARC. It compresses binaries on average about 40% and text anywhere from 50% up. It's slower than ZOO, but I don't mind the wait too much, I just go do something else while I'm waiting. Has anyone else out there got LHARC? I have V0.50... Michael Dinn MDINN@DALAC CBM... Now you're playing with power... supplies.