Back to home page

DOS ain't dead

Forum index page

Log in | Register

Search:  
Back to the forum
Board view  Mix view

DOS Game - Galactic Conquest v9.00 test (Announce)

posted by ecm Homepage E-mail, Düsseldorf, Germany, 11.12.2009, 16:20

> Yes, less archive overhead (filename/path/date/timestamps...) as less
> entries.
Saving unnecessary file headers and such might save more, but that certainly depends on the type of data and storage format.

(Of course compressing all data together probably makes an actual difference.)

> > My old computers all have at least 40 GiB hard disks that
 >
> Harddisks....? Some of my old computers don't even have harddisks :-0
I'm not that long into DOS fandom. That's either sad or good ;-)

> Likewise. But there are times when doing that is still necessary, e.g:
> 256b game competitions
Site seems to be down / replaced by vicious ads. But fitting something into 256 bytes is an interesting task. See MBR and boot sectors for actual applications of that.

> or hardware
> limits!
Or working with DOS kernels and TSRs. Spending some more bytes than necessary there isn't going to kill the system, but I'd rather keep the resident parts small.

> Nor should they providing you stick with the standard default "normal"
> settings. When people start using the maximum/extra compression options
> which are usually often program specific that is when the problems start.
7-Zip does support some of these special options, but I usually stick just with its highest "compression level" 9. These levels don't affect the used method but supposedly try longer/harder to compress the data.

---
l

Post reply
 

Complete thread:

Back to the forum
Board view  Mix view
22632 Postings in 2109 Threads, 402 registered users, 308 users online (0 registered, 308 guests)
DOS ain't dead | Admin contact
RSS Feed
powered by my little forum