Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!casbah.acns.nwu.edu!ucsd!qualcom.qualcomm.com!maui.qualcomm.com!rdippold
From: rdippold@maui.qualcomm.com (Ron Dippold)
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.misc
Subject: Re: relative speeds of file transfer protocols wanted
Message-ID: <1991Feb19.201120.21059@qualcomm.com>
Date: 19 Feb 91 20:11:20 GMT
References: <1991Feb11.133727.1160@minyos.xx.rmit.oz.au> <1991Feb18.203344.1433@qualcomm.com> <1991Feb19.021725.14317@demott.com>
Sender: news@qualcomm.com
Distribution: comp
Organization: Qualcomm, Inc., San Diego, CA
Lines: 37

In article <1991Feb19.021725.14317@demott.com> kdq@demott.com (Kevin D. Quitt) writes:
>In article <1991Feb18.203344.1433@qualcomm.com> rdippold@maui.qualcomm.com (Ron Dippold) writes:
>>
>>There are over 50 protocols, I don't think there are figures on ALL of them.
>>However, if you want figures on the most common ones...
>> [stats]
>>
>>I should note that Puma will perform much faster if you are sending an
>>uncompressed file, as it has a rudimentary packer, as does JMODEM.  The
>>fastest protocol, hands down, is HyperP, it's packing is incredible, even
>>with an alread ZIPped file.  Unfortunately, it has a nasty tendency to
>>freeze if the RX and TX don't synchronize exactly right, so you won't see it
>>on many boards.
>
>    I consider it misleading, at best, and dishonest, at worst, to
>indicate the speed of the modem by examining how many pre-compressed
>bytes per second are transferred.  I have images that compress 100-to-1,
>and kermit sends them at about 140 compressed cps, or about 14000 cps,
>compared to HyperP. 
>
>    Since a lot of traffic cannot be compressed, it is more important to
>give the underlying transfer speed, and *then* start bragging about the
>wonderfulnees of the compression.  And please make sure that data that
>is already compressed doesn't slow down the transfer (like MNP-5 does).

I always assume compressed files, because I have yet to see a bulletin board
system that doesn't archive their files.  All this wonderful stuff about
compression becomes worthless when most files are already compressed.  And if
you want to transfer VAX to PC, use ZOO.  Why would you NOT compress before
transferring?

Finally, every file is different.  I am not about to list the different
protocol speeds for each protocol for text, graphics, GIF, executable, etc.
If you wish to do that, fine, but a pre-compressed file provides a good
common point of comparison.   I see nothing "misleading" or "dishonest"
about it.  I'm suprised you didn't indicate that you were "outraged," that
common expression of mortal indignation.