#1 posted by JneeraZ
on 2008/10/28 16:04:14
The last time I downloaded the Mac version it didn't work.
ZIP is incorporated into the shells for XP, Vista, and OSX so it seems like there's little reason not to use it. All the operating systems in question have native support for it.
My 2 cents, anyway.
#2 posted by RickyT33
on 2008/10/28 16:10:35
What does the second link point to?
Who can make a functional Mac version?
#3 posted by JneeraZ
on 2008/10/28 16:41:45
Well, the source code is irrelevant because IMO this piece of software is irrelevant. There is no advantage to using it anymore.
Unless I'm wrong. If someone can make a compelling case for using a separate file compression program when the operating system supports one natively, I'd love to hear it.
Really, the only reason we're even using ZIP is because it's a convenient packaging mechanism to get stuff onto the web and off of it again. The compression is almost a secondary concern, especially when it comes to something as small as a Quake demo.
I Couldn't Agree More
#4 posted by RickyT33
on 2008/10/28 16:54:16
But I think it would be easier to bury the thing if everyone has the capability to open a .dz file.
Im all up for not using dzip format anymore!
But there will still be demos on the net which are in that format.
I intend to resolutely refrain from creating anymore .dz files, and use zip instead.
How about this - someone make a Mac version which can ONLY exctract .dz files, and not create them... ?
#5 posted by JneeraZ
on 2008/10/28 16:58:27
That's only relevant if Mac people are dying to open the old demos. I don't think they are. The old demos can stay in DZ, it doesn't matter.
#6 posted by Spirit
on 2008/10/28 17:53:28
We had this discussion in some other thread recently and the conclusion was that dzip is obsolete by now.
I am all for 7z as it is a great and open format. But even zip would be more easy nowadays.
#7 posted by ijed
on 2008/10/28 19:23:07
7zip is best. I think the only reason people still want to use dzip is because you don't have to extract it with some engines.
#8 posted by JneeraZ
on 2008/10/28 19:53:55
What 7zip? What's wrong with plain old, fully supported, don't have to install anything to use it, ZIP?
30% Worse Compression
#9 posted by negke
on 2008/10/28 20:05:48
#10 posted by Spirit
on 2008/10/28 20:14:10
7z compresses much much better but I always forget how it also takes longer, heh.
#11 posted by Preach
on 2008/10/28 20:14:18
But 7z is a lot slower in actually extracting things in my experience, it's usually faster to download the larger file of a zip and have it decompressed soon.
#12 posted by JneeraZ
on 2008/10/28 20:17:44
"30% Worse Compression"
OK, fair enough. Can you explain how that matters for Quake demos?
#13 posted by negke
on 2008/10/28 20:29:19
20mb demo files -> .dz: 2.65mb, .zip (7zip): 2.61mb, .7z: 1.81mb.
Note that 7zip's regular ZIP compression is also better than those of other programs. Apart from that it's freeware, supports many other formats, works on various platforms (Mac versions ftw), has a better shell integration, and and and. It's such a dream. Like Harrison Ford.
#14 posted by negke
on 2008/10/28 20:37:39
It doesn't really matter for Quake demos in the age of broadband internet. A few 100KB are neglectable. But in an ideological discussion every single bit counts.
#15 posted by JneeraZ
on 2008/10/28 20:48:44
Well, whatever people go with is fine as long as I can double click it on a freshly installed Mac and have it unpack properly. That's all I care about. :)
#16 posted by Spirit
on 2008/10/28 20:48:50
All the Quaddicted descriptions fit in a 700 Kilobyte ZIP or a 170 Kilobyte 7z.
#17 posted by JneeraZ
on 2008/10/28 20:57:28
Which is a download speed difference of about a half second. :)
#18 posted by JPL
on 2008/10/28 21:06:35
Depends of you link speed ;)
#19 posted by ijed
on 2008/10/28 21:16:11
There's still quite a few out there on dialup.
For big packs its a real saver as well.
Wasn't There A Post
#20 posted by HeadThump
on 2008/10/28 21:45:17
several months ago here that a programmer involved with dzip was a virus writer? I wish I could be more specific but I don't use dzip so I likely just browsed through that post.
#21 posted by PuLSaR
on 2008/10/28 23:24:12
And what about rar?
#22 posted by Trinca
on 2008/10/28 23:29:50
Pulsar, Rar is not a free software to be used in computers like work :| and 7z it is!!!
#23 posted by JneeraZ
on 2008/10/28 23:49:30
7z works for me, fine, whatever. Why is everything such a hassle? :) God forbid we use something standardized and simple like ZIP. Grumble...
#24 posted by ijed
on 2008/10/29 00:29:19
Zip can open 7zip files.
RAR is geared towards music and video compression.
#25 posted by mwh
on 2008/10/29 00:37:18
No, pretty sure you're confusing things there...