delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi | search |
From: | sparhawk AT eunet DOT at (Gerhard Gruber) |
Newsgroups: | comp.os.msdos.djgpp |
Subject: | Re: This is not a problem but... |
Date: | Wed, 01 Jul 1998 21:26:45 GMT |
Organization: | Customer of EUnet Austria |
Lines: | 23 |
Message-ID: | <359da91c.22748421@news.Austria.EU.net> |
References: | <001b01bda51b$082b5700$624d08c3 AT arthur> |
NNTP-Posting-Host: | e205.dynamic.vienna.at.eu.net |
Mime-Version: | 1.0 |
To: | djgpp AT delorie DOT com |
DJ-Gateway: | from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp |
Destination: "Arthur" <arfa AT clara DOT net> From: Gruber Gerhard Group: comp.os.msdos.djgpp Date: Wed, 1 Jul 1998 17:17:22 +0100: >True, but I was thinking strictly theoretically. In practice (especially >with my UDMA Hard Disc with onboard cache) loading the compressed file would >be slower. But think: how much of a speed overhead does compression have? On >my ST, uncompressing a 2MB zipped file takes several minutes. On a DX2/66 it >takes a matter of seconds. Why don't more people use data compression? I do. The (theoretical) speed differences are so minimal on my machine that I rather safe diskspace instead of buying new disks. I just downloaded dlp after it was mentioned here and I'm absolutely hillarious(is this the word?) about it. :) I already packed most of my GNU/BIN directory and it saved about 55%. -- Bye, Gerhard email: sparhawk AT eunet DOT at g DOT gruber AT sis DOT co DOT at Spelling corrections are appreciated.
webmaster | delorie software privacy |
Copyright © 2019 by DJ Delorie | Updated Jul 2019 |