should I consider filecompression?

[Gerard Verhoef]

I plan on upgrading my old p3 450MHz computer (10 G harddisk) from winMe to
Win2000 prof (NTFS).
Since 10G isnt too much diskspace nowadays I wonder is filecompression is an
option.
Can anyone please advise me on this subject.

Questions that come to mind are:
- which folders should / could be compressed?
- is there a performance problem with compressed files?
- is there a stability or compatibility problem?
- how much diskspace might i expect (depending on the filetypes that will be
compressed probably)
- Is using compressed files transparant for the end-users (my kids); do they
need to know which files/folders are compressed, eg does is change
installing software, or mailing files.

Thanks

Gerard

 

[Invisible]

Questions that come to mind are:

- which folders should / could be compressed?

Not too many limitations, AFAIK... Avoid the system boot files. (Little
point in compressing them anyway...)

- is there a performance problem with compressed files?

Yep - when you access a compressed file, its contents are automatically
decompressed. This takes time and memory. (I would avoid compressing things
like Access databases that need highly-random access... In general, compress
things you don't use much.)

- is there a stability or compatibility problem?

Don't know.

- how much diskspace might i expect (depending on the filetypes that will be
compressed probably)

Text files usually compress quite well. Program files can compress well -
but some of them are already internally compressed, and so won't compress
much further. Pictures, sound, video, etc are notorious for being VERY hard
to compress. Also, in general, large files will compress more than small
files. (Usually.)

- Is using compressed files transparant for the end-users (my kids); do they
need to know which files/folders are compressed, eg does is change
installing software, or mailing files.

AFAIK, yes. The OS handles it all automatically.

HTH.