Re: Winzip vs. Windows compression utility
- From: "Rock" <Rock@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 22 May 2007 11:52:10 -0700
"John" wrote
Rock,
I'm working with .jpg files. Care to explain how I could compress the folder that they are in with "bitmap" or whatever. Or is that a bad idea as another poster already suggested?
"Rock" wrote
"John" wroteHi there. People keep on telling me that I can right-click a file and then go Sendto>>Compressed (zipped) folder and that will compress my file. However, when I do this, the file is compressed from 8.38MB to 8.33MB, which to me doesn't seem like a significant difference. when I use Winzip as opposed to the Windows compression utility (I guess that's what it's called when Windows does it for you by the abovementioned procedure) the same thing happens: 8.38 to 8.33. Why aren't these compression services making my files significantly smaller and which one is the best of the two?
It depends on what the file type is. Some are already compressed, for example .jpg and some certain video formats, so you won't see much change, in fact in some cases the size will actually increase. So what kind of file is this.?
You misunderstand. You don't compress with bitmap. Bitmap is a type of graphic file with the extension .bmp. These are not compressed so you will see a space reduction when a .bmp file is compressed. .Jpg files are already compressed, hence very little change.
--
Rock [MS-MVP User/Shell]
.
- References:
- Winzip vs. Windows compression utility
- From: John
- Re: Winzip vs. Windows compression utility
- From: Rock
- Re: Winzip vs. Windows compression utility
- From: John
- Winzip vs. Windows compression utility
- Prev by Date: Re: SATA/IDE Adapter & XP
- Next by Date: Re: SATA/IDE Adapter & XP
- Previous by thread: Re: Winzip vs. Windows compression utility
- Next by thread: Re: Winzip vs. Windows compression utility
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|