Func_Msgboard: DZip - Lol!

News | Forum | People | FAQ | Links | Register | Log in

|  | DZip - Lol!

Posted by RickyT23 [86.139.126.162] on 2008/10/28 14:54:15

It must be funny how things work out!
We spend a lot of time talking about how dzip is a pain in the ass now, rather than the godsend it used to be for you all back in the days of dial up.
Problem?
What about all of the archived stuff which is in dzip format which cant be used by Mac users?
(This is the case, right?)
Either:
Someone re-package all of the stuff into zip format, another archiving job which could be incorporated into some poor guys website and would probably never get done because its a ball ache;
OR
Someone mae a DZip tool for the mac.
And
We should try a stick to zip files for demos FNO?
stuff: http://speeddemosarchive.com/dzip/...
WTF?!?!: http://www.freebsdsoftware.org/arc...
LOL! http://filext.com/file-extension/D...
(check out the bit where it says "click here to run scan for .DZ related errors"!)
Well according to the SDA link there is a Mac version? So why the tussling?
(PS I know this is retarded)

#1 posted by Willem [24.199.192.130] 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.
Willem!!!
#2 posted by RickyT23 [86.139.126.162] on 2008/10/28 16:10:35
What does the second link point to?
Who can make a functional Mac version?
#3 posted by Willem [24.199.192.130] 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 RickyT23 [86.139.126.162] 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 Willem [24.199.192.130] 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 [213.39.187.136] 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.
Yeah,
#7 posted by ijed [216.241.20.2] 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 Willem [24.199.192.130] 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 [82.83.10.1] on 2008/10/28 20:05:48
#10 posted by Spirit [213.39.187.136] on 2008/10/28 20:14:10
7z compresses much much better but I always forget how it also takes longer, heh.
Yeah
#11 posted by Preach [217.44.219.175] 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 Willem [24.199.192.130] 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 [82.83.10.1] 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.
Well
#14 posted by negke [82.83.10.1] 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 Willem [24.199.192.130] 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. :)
Yes
#16 posted by Spirit [213.39.187.136] 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 Willem [24.199.192.130] on 2008/10/28 20:57:28
Which is a download speed difference of about a half second. :)
Willem
#18 posted by JPL [82.234.167.238] on 2008/10/28 21:06:35
Depends of you link speed ;)
Yep
#19 posted by ijed [216.241.20.2] 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 [4.136.90.211] 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 [91.203.96.24] on 2008/10/28 23:24:12
And what about rar?
#22 posted by Trinca [89.180.140.77] 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 Willem [75.177.185.17] 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...
AFAIK
#24 posted by ijed [190.20.125.9] on 2008/10/29 00:29:19
Zip can open 7zip files.
RAR is geared towards music and video compression.
HeadThump
#25 posted by mwh [92.54.156.162] on 2008/10/29 00:37:18
No, pretty sure you're confusing things there...
I Say We Do It QW Style
#26 posted by scar3crow [207.109.247.122] on 2008/10/29 01:06:17
and dl everything completely uncompressed. Yeah I had nothing to offer to this.
Pkunzip 4 Lyfe
#27 posted by pope [24.85.35.223] on 2008/10/29 02:30:14
nt
I Think You Are Right
#28 posted by HeadThump [4.136.90.184] on 2008/10/29 03:46:02
The issue has come up a few times on this board concerning spotty Dzip matters,
http://www.google.com/search?q=dzi...
but I couldn't find anything about a particular individual. I must be conflating two separate matters.
HeadThump
#29 posted by Lardarse [62.31.165.111] on 2008/10/29 04:29:41
I have commented that many virus checkers see the DZip installer as a virus, before.
#30 posted by [Kona] [118.93.242.153] on 2008/10/29 05:43:40
dzip never worked proper for me... it would conflict with opening stuff in dreamweaver. i'd click 'edit html page in dreamwweaver' and instead fkn dzip would try to open in for no reason.
#31 posted by PuLSaR [91.203.96.24] on 2008/10/29 10:54:01
Rar can decompress 7z files. Also it can repair broken archives
Willem
#32 posted by RickyT23 [86.139.126.162] on 2008/10/29 11:51:55
What happens when you download a .7z file on your Mac? Can you just click it and open it, or is it a ball-ache?
The reason I suggested .zip is because of the compatibility. Although I like the 7z format very much, infact it's the main program I use for all achive-related operations. Except for exctracting .zip files....
But a format which requires searching through the internet for a specific program isn't THAT much better than bloody DZip.
#33 posted by Willem [75.177.185.17] on 2008/10/29 12:00:50
7z is fine. ZIP would be better but I'm done fighting the crowd on this. :)
/me Unzips
#34 posted by Spirit [213.39.214.106] on 2008/10/29 12:17:38
Go for zip. Everyone uses it. It is the smallest common denominator (or however you says that). 7z is superior but hey, we all like our easy habits. There are many many "stoopid" people who like playing Quake and who would be completely overwhelmed by the need for installing something like 7z. Easier = better, even if the download takes a bit longer.
Yeah
#35 posted by ijed [190.20.125.9] on 2008/10/29 12:21:08
It's only a fight if you think it is.
My point with 7zip was that it uses standard compression, so most stuff can open it's archives, including normal zip. So you pack it in 7zip then people can open it with what they like.
Getting someone to install a zip program they don't want to use probably requires torture.
Reminds Me Of Something I Read At Qw.nu Recently
#36 posted by negke [82.82.184.188] on 2008/10/29 12:23:00
gah, mind uploading just the .bsp-file? I get so annoyed with everything being .rar'd these days
And while you're at it, would you mind copying it into my quake dir, run the game and even play it for me?
#37 posted by Willem [24.199.192.130] on 2008/10/29 14:20:23
He has a point though. Why put up roadblocks to someone looking at your level? It's ridiculous to blame the end user. RAR? Die in a fire. ZIP it.
Lol!
#38 posted by RickyT23 [86.139.126.162] on 2008/10/29 14:44:59
7Zip BTW pissed all over .rar files. "The 7Zip File Manager" I mean. Infact it opens files which I didn't even realise were archives.
.rar files are good for a purpose - the ability to whack things down into smaller compressed bite sized chunks, so a computer doesn't have to re-download the entire thing if there is corruption . . . or you can put a 4.5Gb file onto thousands of floppys. Hooray! :D
And it's free.
But at the end of the day why fight the system?
On A Freshly Installed Gentoo Linux
#39 posted by gb [89.27.202.9] on 2008/10/29 15:59:14
I can't double click a 7z and it will open.
So by your logic, Willem, it sucks ass.
Fuck. I have to install it.
I mean. Seriously.
ZIP, too.
Everybody should please use .tar.bz2, in the age of broadband internet it should be no problem for you all to install Ubuntu, I mean, it's free.
Problem solved.
;-)
So We Can Watch Our Demos
#40 posted by RickyT23 [86.139.126.162] on 2008/10/29 16:07:26
on a freshly set up PS3 with Linux and some kind of Quake port?
Of Course
#41 posted by gb [89.27.202.9] on 2008/10/29 16:09:12
seriously, really.
I Thought A Brit Would Get A Joke.
#42 posted by gb [89.27.202.9] on 2008/10/29 21:05:42
Dzip Limitations....
#43 posted by metlslime [64.175.155.252] on 2008/10/29 21:40:03
i noticed recently that dzip performs no better than zip when compressing demos that use a custom protocol. So that's a point against it.
Also, is there some maximum demo filesize beyond which, dzip will use normal zip compression?
Uh
#44 posted by Mr Fribbles [150.101.155.114] on 2008/10/30 02:48:55
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.
Why didn't the discussion end here?
Mac Os X Users
#45 posted by grahf [24.125.41.191] on 2008/10/30 04:09:03
should just get TheUnarchiver, it opens just about everything, no problem.
#46 posted by [Kona] [118.93.242.153] on 2008/10/30 06:53:55
yeah i tried to install ubunta. it crashed on installation with some nonsense error. nice.
#47 posted by metlslime [64.175.155.252] on 2008/10/30 07:12:12
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.
Why didn't the discussion end here?
Frib, you mean I have to install a whole operating system just to have a functioning computer? Can't we just print the demos in comic book form and hand them out on street corners?
#48 posted by Willem [75.177.185.17] on 2008/10/30 10:07:04
"Why didn't the discussion end here?"
Yeah, I dunno. Surprised me as well.
#49 posted by mwh [92.54.156.162] on 2008/10/30 10:17:53
"Why didn't the discussion end here?"
Welcome to the endless fun of the internet!
#50 posted by Willem [75.177.185.17] on 2008/10/30 10:35:13
Dude, 30% better compression! We can save, like, 5 milliseconds of download time! Totally worth it!
Hmm
#51 posted by nonentity [87.194.146.225] on 2008/10/30 11:18:22
Of course it's worth it. With all those saved milliseconds we have time to have pointless discussions about compression ;p
Metslime
#52 posted by ijed [216.241.20.2] on 2008/10/30 13:56:42
Yes, and it's pretty low - didn't work for any of the warp demos.
The compression size wasn't the issue, the fact that normal zip routinely corrupts stuff was/is.
Dzip also occasionally corrupts archives when it's internal size limit is breached and it reverts to normal zip.
I don't think I've seen a corrupt 7zip archive, and only a handful of rar ones.
But hey, I get a kick out of those extras precious seconds afforded by smaller filesize.
Seeing an archive reduced by a few K because I've changed the compression method is like snorting coke off a hooker's ass for me.
Bah
#53 posted by ijed [216.241.20.2] on 2008/10/30 13:59:51
Yes, and it's pretty low - didn't work for any of the warp demos.
That should 'wouldn't have worked for any of the warp demos if they weren't in their own protocol as well'
#54 posted by Trinca [194.65.24.228] on 2008/10/30 14:39:14
in these days why argue of discuss 2 or 3 mb in a file?
roulf... i got unlimited downloads :)
Hmm
#55 posted by nonentity [87.194.146.225] on 2008/10/30 15:43:26
Seeing an archive reduced by a few K because I've changed the compression method is like snorting coke off a hooker's ass for me.
Honestly, I don't see the similarity...
Ijed
#56 posted by gb [89.27.238.66] on 2008/10/30 19:28:27
lol
I've Never Seen
#57 posted by megaman [92.73.95.123] on 2008/10/30 19:32:02
zip brake things. Ever.
You've Never
#58 posted by ijed [216.241.20.2] on 2008/10/30 20:19:34
Downloaded or accidentally uploaded a broken archive?
I Don't Think
#59 posted by SleepwalkR [85.179.9.154] on 2008/10/30 23:22:51
that zip is privy to breaking an archive. The problem might be that it got corrupted during the transfer, although that is unlikely too. I seriously have never seen zip produce a corrupt archive myself.
#60 posted by Willem [63.133.201.66] on 2008/10/30 23:33:55
I've never seen a broken ZIP either. Not sure what to tell ya.
#61 posted by PuLSaR [91.203.96.24] on 2008/10/30 23:58:29
End of discussion.
Too tired to post it in the drunk thread
Huh
#62 posted by ijed [190.20.86.185] on 2008/10/31 00:28:27
I've seen quite a few then - I thought it was normal. Maybe packet loss is the culprit then.
Unlikely
#63 posted by SleepwalkR [85.179.0.40] on 2008/10/31 04:15:04
Becaus if you download a ZIP from the internet, it's via FTP or HTTP, which sit on top of TCP, which automatically checks the integrity of all transferred packets.
Fair Enough
#64 posted by ijed [190.20.86.185] on 2008/10/31 04:37:04
Argued back into my corner again.
But as I said before, getting someone to use another compression format is like pulling teeth.
7zip for life dog.
I Don't Care
#65 posted by SleepwalkR [85.179.0.40] on 2008/10/31 08:14:51
As long as it's not dzip ;-)
#66 posted by Willem [63.133.201.66] on 2008/10/31 11:32:15
I'll relent and say that as long as StuffIt can open it on the Mac, I don't care.
Check Out The Speed Demos Archive
#67 posted by RickyT23 [86.139.126.162] on 2008/10/31 11:45:15
loads of new .dz files there!
Willem
#68 posted by SleepwalkR [82.82.138.23] on 2008/10/31 13:27:21
Check out The Unarchiver: http://wakaba.c3.cx/s/apps/unarchi...
It is really superior to stuffit, although it does have some trouble with certain newer stuffit archives. But then, who still uses stuffit?
I Concur With Sleepwalkr
#69 posted by grahf [24.125.41.191] on 2008/10/31 15:38:18
See post #45.
Stuffit was pretty obsolete the minute Apple integrated BOMArchiveHelper into OS X. Why would one need a separate bloated program, to do what OS X does natively?
But yeah, Unarchiver will open freaky stuff like rar and 7z that Apple's integrated thingy won't.
However
#70 posted by SleepwalkR [82.82.138.23] on 2008/10/31 15:57:58
The Unarchiver also has problems with certain versions of RAR archives, esp. if they are password protected. You'd either have to use the official RAR or RAR expander http://rarexpander.sourceforge.net...
#71 posted by Willem [63.133.201.66] on 2008/10/31 17:19:44
"But then, who still uses stuffit?"
Whatever my machine will currently open is handling every single download I do ... except DZip. Make that go away and I'm gold.

Post A Reply:

Name: |
Title: |
Body: |

Website copyright © 2002-2011 John Fitzgibbons. All posts are copyright their respective authors.