On Thursday, December 02, 1999 Alexander V. Kiselev wrote:
>> Do you people know Jar archiver? It compresses much better than rar,
>> but it's a command-line only program. It's made by the author of ARJ.
> It uses almost the same algorithm as arj and therefore can't be
> better then rar. Through my own tests, they work either in par
> (single files) or rar is 10% better (lots of various type files
> archived together). This information applies to RAR solid
> archiving.
Well, I usually compress programs I download from the net and at this
field jar is almost always better than rar. For example I compressed
thebat directory (without the mail). Rar for Dos made a file of
1613536 bytes, WinRAR made file of 1614723 and Jar32 made a file of
1562943 bytes. Of course I used Rar's best method and solid archiving.
Sometimes the difference is even bigger.
--
Christopher J. Trybowski
===========================================================================
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- uin: 4350719 ---
---- http://www.trybik.i.krakow.pl --- pgp-keys: 0xB92EEE69 0x9382700B ----
========( get-pgp-key: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?Subject=send_key )========
Using The Bat! 1.38 Beta/5 [reg] under Windows 98 4.10 build 1998.
--
--------------------------------------------------------------
View the TBBETA archive at http://tbbeta.thebat.dutaint.com
To send a message to the list moderation team double-click HERE:
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To Unsubscribe from TBBETA, double-click HERE:
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--------------------------------------------------------------
