Best Compression Choice

Moderator
Posts: 770
Joined: 2003.04
Post: #16
OneSadCookie Wrote:If you're building an OS 9 app, you've probably got some resources. In that case, your only choice is a .dmg-based solution.

Does OS 9 support .dmg? I thought the Disk Copy in OS 9 could only open .img
Execution bits/permissions are not an issue in OS 9, so you could provide an OS X version in .zip/.tbz and a smaller .sit for OS 9.

Also, if you want to compress a dmg, do not make a compressed disk image and then zip it: Make a read only image and then make a zip out of the dmg, it will be a lot smaller.
Quote this message in a reply
Luminary
Posts: 5,143
Joined: 2002.04
Post: #17
true, 9 doesn't support .dmg...

time to stop supporting those 2 OS 9 users Rasp
Quote this message in a reply
Sage
Posts: 1,482
Joined: 2002.09
Post: #18
Finder .zip's are also resource friendly btw.

I'd seriously just go with an internet enabled .dmg. That's definitely the simplest for your users if you think that normal disk images are too complicated.

Unless size is really really an issue, c'mon it's 500k we're talking about right?
Quote this message in a reply
Member
Posts: 509
Joined: 2002.05
Post: #19
Skorche Wrote:Finder .zip's are also resource friendly btw.

Really? Thats awesome, I am going to try that for Escape and Hydrothermal, it will be easier to keep one file than two different ones.

If that doesn't work I will go with internet .dmgs.
Quote this message in a reply
Luminary
Posts: 5,143
Joined: 2002.04
Post: #20
Finder's .zip files are resource-friendly if unzipped with the Finder on 10.3+. They're not resource-friendly in general terms.
Quote this message in a reply
Member
Posts: 509
Joined: 2002.05
Post: #21
Thanks, I'm glad I found that out before uploading.

Back to the DMGs
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 

Possibly Related Threads...
Thread: Author Replies: Views: Last Post
  Installer Compression Rasterman 12 4,841 Feb 4, 2010 09:53 AM
Last Post: Rasterman