• This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn more.

Winace

L

Leevoy

Guest
#1
O.K. someone shed light on this scenario please.

I run Xp pro, cluster size is 512 bytes.

I downloaded some filters and some 1700 in one folder.
The ext was .ace so i downloaded the decompression app to use it as power desk and win zip don't support it.

When I unzipped they went from 2 megs to 50, yes 50 times their original size, 100 meg.

I decided to compress them back and stick em on my zip drive, which they zipped down to 1.87 megs.

The point is, when I download some zip files they unzip 3 times, 4 times, 10 times and in this case 100 times bigger.

I have tried myself to zip up 100 meg of files from my zip drive into a smaller file for some space and I am lucky to gain 4 meg of space.

Is it a fact they were compressed on fat or fat 32 and when hitting my 512 byte cluster ntfs drive explode to much larger size.

Can someone shed a little light on it, as I am quite impressed with win ace and would like to continue after the trial by buying it.
 
L

lechtard

Guest
#2
the only thing I can say is that winace sux - Depending on what the file will depend on how much it gets compressed .. it makes no diff whether it's fat, fat32, or ntfs ..
 

SPeedY_B

I may actually be insane.
#4
Different compression methods will work better on different files.
As for the interface, most applications tend to handle other forms of archive these days (WinZip, WinRAR, WinAce etc will all handle rar, zip and ace files)
Personally I think that WinRAR is the best interface of the lot.
 
L

Leevoy

Guest
#5
Originally posted by SPeedY_B
Different compression methods will work better on different files.
As for the interface, most applications tend to handle other forms of archive these days (WinZip, WinRAR, WinAce etc will all handle rar, zip and ace files)
Personally I think that WinRAR is the best interface of the lot.
:rolleyes:

Thanks for answering my question speedy.
 
#7
Originally posted by chaos945
WinRAR for me, Z-Zip is not bad either.
Did you mean 7-Zip? That's what I'm using at the moment. The interface is a little clunkier than WinRAR, but it's nice and lightweight once you get used to it. Besides, the a .7z compressed file is supposed to be the smallest you can get.
 
#8
I press Z every single time I talk about that program.......something to do with the brain pan me thinks.

Only draw back is 7-Zip does not split files like WinRAR. So I have to leave WinRAR installed as well.
 

Kush

High On Life!
#9
i thought winrar has the best compression. anyways i think its the best havent used 7zip yet. will try it in the future, anyways i think winrar is the most user friendy with expert features while having a very small installation package size! WINRAR ROCKS!!!
 

Members online

Latest posts

Latest profile posts

Hello, is there anybody in there? Just nod if you can hear me ...
Xie
What a long strange trip it's been. =)

Forum statistics

Threads
61,961
Messages
673,239
Members
89,013
Latest member
Pdawgintown