At 09:52 -0900 2/26/01, matt barkdull wrote:
[snip]
>I know that the on-fly compression is difficult to maintain speed,
>but it seems like better than 2:1 should be possible. I'm not much
>of a wiz at all with compression, however I see modems getting
>v.42bis (4:1) on the fly, it seems like a little work and this
>should be possible for client and server as well.
>
>Yes, I know that advertised and what you really get are totally
>different, but all I know is that if something is advertised at 4:1,
>it will be more likely to get at least 2:1 that 2:1 is likely to.
For my backups at least (mostly graphics) I doubt that the savings
would amount to more than 2 or 3 percent. Modems only approach those
numbers on text files.
>Alladin is cross platform. Dantz covers the same platforms.
>
>Yes, most people use hardware compression, but this is mostly
>because the hardware and software compression are likely to get the
>same results.
>
>Why would anyone want to write their own compression? I mean, a
>license deal from Alladin, who's been doing it since the early days
>of Mac, would seem like it would be far more cost effective.
Yep and their file format (or formats as it were) as far as I can
tell are proprietary. If Dantz did implement compression, I for one
would be much more comfortable with a open file format.
--
-Steve
---
Steve Axthelm
Mudpuppy Studios
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
503.227.1775
--
----------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Archives: <http://list.working-dogs.com/lists/retro-talk/>
Search: <http://www.mail-archive.com/retro-talk%40latchkey.com/>
For urgent issues, please contact Dantz technical support directly at
[EMAIL PROTECTED] or 925.253.3050.
