New to XP...A question about compressing the drive to save space?

Discussion in 'Computer Support' started by WF, Aug 25, 2005.

  1. WF

    WF Guest

    I was exploring my computer and found this in the drive
    properties.box. Is this a common practice amongst you pros? Is there
    any drawbacks to this.? How much can I expect to save? I don't want to
    screw around with something unfamiliar. Any thoughts on this?
    WF, Aug 25, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. WF

    Toolman Tim Guest

    WF wrote:
    > I was exploring my computer and found this in the drive
    > properties.box. Is this a common practice amongst you pros? Is there
    > any drawbacks to this.? How much can I expect to save? I don't want to
    > screw around with something unfamiliar. Any thoughts on this?


    Due to the built-in compression of video files, music files, etc., I find I
    don't get much value out of compression. In fact, a lot of times when a
    compressed file is compressed again by the OS, the opposite occurs - the
    file gets larger.

    I haven't, however, tried compression on a system drive. I've only
    compressed data drives.

    --
    Indecision is the key to flexibility.
    Toolman Tim, Aug 25, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. WF

    Ghostrider Guest

    WF wrote:
    > I was exploring my computer and found this in the drive
    > properties.box. Is this a common practice amongst you pros? Is there
    > any drawbacks to this.? How much can I expect to save? I don't want to
    > screw around with something unfamiliar. Any thoughts on this?



    Work and data too valuable to foul up, even with backups
    galore, by squeezing files into smaller pieces. Time is
    also valuable, making it better not to waste on expansion
    of compressed files. Sure it cost more to utilize larger
    and more hard drives and other fast storage media, but
    this is a professional, computer-driven organization.
    Ghostrider, Aug 25, 2005
    #3
  4. WF

    Toolman Tim Guest

    Ghostrider wrote:
    > WF wrote:
    >> I was exploring my computer and found this in the drive
    >> properties.box. Is this a common practice amongst you pros? Is there
    >> any drawbacks to this.? How much can I expect to save? I don't want
    >> to screw around with something unfamiliar. Any thoughts on this?

    >
    >
    > Work and data too valuable to foul up, even with backups
    > galore, by squeezing files into smaller pieces.


    I've never experienced a failure of an NT based OS not being able to
    uncompress the files it compressed. We're not talking the old DOS methods
    here of mounting a compressed volume on a drive. This is the NT kernal and
    XP.

    > Time is
    > also valuable, making it better not to waste on expansion
    > of compressed files.


    With today's blazing fast CPUs and hard drives, that really isn't an issue
    anymore.

    > Sure it cost more to utilize larger
    > and more hard drives and other fast storage media, but
    > this is a professional, computer-driven organization.


    --
    Indecision is the key to flexibility.
    Toolman Tim, Aug 25, 2005
    #4
  5. WF

    Ghostrider Guest

    Toolman Tim wrote:

    > Ghostrider wrote:
    >
    >>WF wrote:
    >>
    >>>I was exploring my computer and found this in the drive
    >>>properties.box. Is this a common practice amongst you pros? Is there
    >>>any drawbacks to this.? How much can I expect to save? I don't want
    >>>to screw around with something unfamiliar. Any thoughts on this?

    >>
    >>
    >>Work and data too valuable to foul up, even with backups
    >>galore, by squeezing files into smaller pieces.

    >
    >
    > I've never experienced a failure of an NT based OS not being able to
    > uncompress the files it compressed. We're not talking the old DOS methods
    > here of mounting a compressed volume on a drive. This is the NT kernal and
    > XP.
    >
    >
    >>Time is
    >>also valuable, making it better not to waste on expansion
    >>of compressed files.

    >
    >
    > With today's blazing fast CPUs and hard drives, that really isn't an issue
    > anymore.
    >
    >
    >>Sure it cost more to utilize larger
    >>and more hard drives and other fast storage media, but
    >>this is a professional, computer-driven organization.



    OK. Too old-fashioned to change philosophy, this ancient,
    professional number cruncher. Speed is everything. Ready
    for 3.8 GHz desktops? <:-}}
    Ghostrider, Aug 25, 2005
    #5
  6. WF

    Toolman Tim Guest

    Ghostrider wrote:
    > Toolman Tim wrote:
    >
    >> Ghostrider wrote:
    >>
    >>> WF wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> I was exploring my computer and found this in the drive
    >>>> properties.box. Is this a common practice amongst you pros? Is
    >>>> there any drawbacks to this.? How much can I expect to save? I
    >>>> don't want to screw around with something unfamiliar. Any thoughts
    >>>> on this?
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> Work and data too valuable to foul up, even with backups
    >>> galore, by squeezing files into smaller pieces.

    >>
    >>
    >> I've never experienced a failure of an NT based OS not being able to
    >> uncompress the files it compressed. We're not talking the old DOS
    >> methods here of mounting a compressed volume on a drive. This is the
    >> NT kernal and XP.
    >>
    >>
    >>> Time is
    >>> also valuable, making it better not to waste on expansion
    >>> of compressed files.

    >>
    >>
    >> With today's blazing fast CPUs and hard drives, that really isn't an
    >> issue anymore.
    >>
    >>
    >>> Sure it cost more to utilize larger
    >>> and more hard drives and other fast storage media, but
    >>> this is a professional, computer-driven organization.

    >
    >
    > OK. Too old-fashioned to change philosophy, this ancient,
    > professional number cruncher. Speed is everything. Ready
    > for 3.8 GHz desktops? <:-}}


    In my dreams <g>! I have 3.0 at home, 3.2 at work. 'Course, the laptop is a
    tad slower (halfish <g>)

    --
    Indecision is the key to flexibility.
    Toolman Tim, Aug 25, 2005
    #6
  7. WF

    philo Guest

    "WF" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > I was exploring my computer and found this in the drive
    > properties.box. Is this a common practice amongst you pros? Is there
    > any drawbacks to this.? How much can I expect to save? I don't want to
    > screw around with something unfamiliar. Any thoughts on this?


    Although compressing an NTFS drive is safe...as compared to the old days of
    fat/32 compression...
    with today's large harddrives...I would not bother with it...
    I doubt that many people use it
    philo, Aug 25, 2005
    #7
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. balado

    compressing big files

    balado, May 16, 2005, in forum: Firefox
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    676
    Tony Raven
    May 16, 2005
  2. Khosrow
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    399
    Khosrow
    Aug 10, 2003
  3. David

    Compressing wav files.

    David, Oct 26, 2003, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    610
    Shep©
    Oct 26, 2003
  4. James
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    351
    James
    Jul 1, 2004
  5. Jeff Strickland

    Compress drive to save disk space

    Jeff Strickland, Jul 25, 2009, in forum: Computer Information
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    1,860
Loading...

Share This Page