Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!ists!yunexus!maccs!cs4g6ag From: cs4g6ag@maccs.dcss.mcmaster.ca (Stephen M. Dunn) Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc Subject: Re: ZIP utility Message-ID: <26046377.8786@maccs.dcss.mcmaster.ca> Date: 19 Mar 90 04:43:35 GMT References: <1990Mar15.012316.24288@Neon.Stanford.EDU> <1501@watserv1.waterloo.edu> <27978@cup.portal.com> Reply-To: cs4g6ag@maccs.dcss.mcmaster.ca (Stephen M. Dunn) Organization: McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario Lines: 35 In article <27978@cup.portal.com> ghost@cup.portal.com (Robert Bruce Ferrell) writes: $I belive the latest release is 1.02... or is it 10.2? Anyway It's 1.02. [...] $Take my advice, use ARC... its more stable and nowhere near as $flakey and version/machine sensitive. It's also no faster than PKZIP (slower if you use PKZIP's fast compression option) and produces archives which are much larger (like 20-35% larger). A couple of extracts and notes from the March 1990 issue of BYTE magazine: "ARC ... has a bad habit of not cleaning up after itself." "ARC is a run-of-the-mill performer that has been left in PKzip's dust." And the following informal tests, run on the same hardware (a 286) and using the same files (a mixture of executables and text, totalling 303 091 bytes across 10 files): ARC 6.02: final size 161 319 bytes; compress 24 sec, extract 15 sec PKZIP 1.02, fast: 153 257 10 13 PKZIP 1.02, optimal: 123 572 29 10 So I'd have to say that PKZIP is definitely the one to go with unless you find a particular flaw. If anyone knows of specific problems (don't just say "It sometimes dies", say "it dies when you do this") with PKZIP V1.02, please post your problem and say what processor you're using. -- Stephen M. Dunn cs4g6ag@maccs.dcss.mcmaster.ca = "\nI'm only an undergraduate!!!\n"; **************************************************************************** "So sorry, I never meant to break your heart ... but you broke mine."