I'm running 10.4.5 on a 1.25 GHz 20" iMac with 768 MB of RAM. I am looking
for the most effective (and free) way to compress files so I can backup
folders onto one CD.
I tried several methods. Here's what I did: I took 3 folders -- 1 with
mostly JPEGs and other pic formats (369 MB); 1 with mostly Word documents
(though some had JPEGs in them) and PowerPoint docs with JPEGs in them (330
MB); and 1 with mostly PDFs and straight Word docs (442 MB) -- and I put
them into a new folder called "CompressTest" that weighed in at 1,141 MB,
then tried the Archive function in Disk Utility and got almost no
compression (only down to 1,020 MB). So I tried using the Mac OS 10.4.5
Create Archive function under the Finder's File menu, but I got the same
results.
I later tried to use Disk Utility to make that folder into a .dmg disk
image, but twice I got errors (the error read: "Unable to create
"CompressTest" - error 49168").
Then I downloaded the trial version of Stuffit Deluxe and one by one tried
the .sitx, .tar and .zip compression routines, and the best archive size I
got was 982 MB (.sitx). I just read that the latest DropStuff supposedly
can compress JPEGS by up to an additional 30% without any change in quality.
You think that's marketing BS? How does Stuffit Standard or Deluxe compare
to any free solutions? I don't want to spend any money on this because I
will use it so infrequently and pretty much only for doing CD backups, but I
never know what new computer uses I will encounter in the future. I tried a
few freeware solutions, but got the same results.
Is there a better free way to such compress folders so I can backup MORE
than 700 MB of data on a CD-RW? Am I doing something wrong?
Also, when using OS X's Archive function, does it matter (in terms of
compression) whether I select whole folders instead of all the files inside
them? I have maybe 5 folders filled with 200-ish files, and the archive
function only compressed them down to 95% of their original size, which I
did by selecting the 5 folders and then hitting the Archive command in the
Finder. Does it work better if I expand the folders and then click on all
the files inside instead of just the folders' icons?
Thanks.
sharpestmarble - 26 Feb 2006 14:36 GMT
Getting 1141 MB down to a size good for putting on a CD is on the order
of a 50% compression ratio. I don't think you're going to be able to
achieve that ratio with the breakdown you have listed. Text documents,
yes. But with a lot of binary data like in a JPEG, I don't think so.
spat - 26 Feb 2006 15:02 GMT
I now understand my problem -- can't compress stuff that's already
compressed. Thanks to everyone for their interest.
Jay
On 2/26/06 8:36 AM, in article
1140964602.741306.133290@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com, "sharpestmarble"
> Getting 1141 MB down to a size good for putting on a CD is on the order
> of a 50% compression ratio. I don't think you're going to be able to
> achieve that ratio with the breakdown you have listed. Text documents,
> yes. But with a lot of binary data like in a JPEG, I don't think so.
Spat - 27 Feb 2006 00:30 GMT
UPDATE: I just tried compressing that same folder using a freeware app
called EZ 7z, which very slowly compressed it into the 7z zip archive
format. It had a good compression rate, beating StuffIt Deluxe (using the
.sitx archive format) by 26.4 MB -- bringing my 1.11 GB folder (filled with
various already-compressed files, as detailed below) down to 955.6 MB. Then
I tried another freeware compression app called MiniDropRar, which
compressed (also slowly) it down to 940.5 MB! Then I tried again using OS
X's Create Archive contextual menu command, and it rather quickly brought it
down to only a 1,013 MB .zip archive. So, it looks like I'll be using
MiniDropRar from now on. Thanks again for everyone's input.
On 2/25/06 12:01 PM, in article C025F79B.1555%spat@mchsi.com, "spat"
> I'm running 10.4.5 on a 1.25 GHz 20" iMac with 768 MB of RAM. I am looking
> for the most effective (and free) way to compress files so I can backup
[quoted text clipped - 36 lines]
>
> Thanks.
sharpestmarble - 27 Feb 2006 15:13 GMT
I'd still use all the utilities. For this particular "slant" of data,
MiniDropRar gave the best results. But it might not always give the
best results.