Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!thunder.mcrcim.mcgill.edu!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!apple!usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!ub!uhura.cc.rochester.edu!rochester!pt.cs.cmu.edu!henry.ECE.CMU.EDU!hairston
From: hairston@henry.ECE.CMU.EDU (David Hairston)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.apps
Subject: Re: Compact Pro 1.30 vs. StuffIt Deluxe 2.0.1 (performance)
Message-ID: <11867@pt.cs.cmu.edu>
Date: 9 Feb 91 17:02:19 GMT
References: <44168@nigel.ee.udel.edu>
Organization: Gaia II
Lines: 23

[johnston@oscar.ccm.udel.edu writes:]
[] ...
[] upgraded; the performance of Compact Pro and StuffIt Deluxe 2.0.1 
[] are compared below.
[] ...
[] Discussion:
[] 
[] Compact Pro 1.30 was found to be more efficient than 
[] StuffIt Deluxe 2.0.1 for all files types and compression options 
[] investigated.  Compact Pro extracted it's own archives faster
[] than Deluxe unStuffed any of the archives it created.  Compact Pro
[] also extracted net.standard StuffIt 1.5.1 archives dramatically
[] faster than did StuffIt Deluxe for any of it's extraction options.

I read your article with much interest.  There are areas you didn't
mention i.e. application size, installation and so on.  Also, I was
curious, you didn't reach a "Conclusion".  Are the facts, in this case,
supposed to speak for themselves?  Certainly this is no simple matter
so there can be no real simple conclusion but still I was left
wondering what yours might be.

  -dave-  
hairston@henry.ece.cmu.edu