Author Topic: Other compression methods aside Stuffit  (Read 18161 times)

Offline Protools5LEGuy

  • Global Moderator
  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 2555
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 1151
Other compression methods aside Stuffit
« on: January 19, 2015, 12:52:31 PM »
Based on http://macintoshgarden.org/apps/utilities/compression-archiving

There are lots of utilities we are not aware of (at least most of us)

.RAR


Mac UnRAR 1.2   http://macintoshgarden.org/apps/mac-unrar-12
MacRAR 2.5.1 (Fat)  http://macintoshgarden.org/apps/macrar-251-fat


Quote from: bender
Keep in mind that this software won't decompress RAR archives created with WinRAR 3.0 or later as the file format changed and this tool was not updated.
so this has limited compatibility

there may be many apps but compatibility + reliability is something that determines their usability.. and history of wider audience acceptance (or lack of acceptance)


.ZIP

MacGzip 1.1.3  http://macintoshgarden.org/apps/macgzip-113


MacZip 1.06  http://macintoshgarden.org/apps/maczip-106


ZipIt
ZipIt 1.4 & 2.1 http://macintoshgarden.org/apps/zipit-14-21


ZipIt 2.2 http://macintoshgarden.org/apps/zipit




SPLITTING FILES

SplitIt! v2.0  http://macintoshgarden.org/apps/splitit-v20





Split & Join 1.2.1  http://macintoshgarden.org/apps/split-join-121






« Last Edit: January 19, 2015, 01:26:34 PM by Protools5LEGuy »
Looking for MacOS 9.2.4

Offline Protools5LEGuy

  • Global Moderator
  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 2555
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 1151
Re: Other compression methods aside Stuffit
« Reply #1 on: January 19, 2015, 01:49:00 PM »
Quote from: bender
Keep in mind that this software won't decompress RAR archives created with WinRAR 3.0 or later as the file format changed and this tool was not updated.
so this has limited compatibility

there may be many apps but compatibility + reliability is something that determines their usability.. and history of wider audience acceptance (or lack of acceptance)


Let's try to find various workflow.

If we use WinRAR 2.5.1 it should work with MacRAR 2.5.1 (Fat).

If we use Gzip 1.2.4,  it should work with MacGzip 1.1.3

If we use MacZip 1.06


MacZip based at Info-ZIP.
Info-ZIP devlopers say about 99,99% compatibility with PKZIP standard.
This is good news for users another type computers.

If you have zip archive with filenames (for example) in ISO8859-2 code or other national codes, only MacZip can unpack it.
Stuffit Expander and ZipIt surrend.

I have to add Aaron's Zipper http://aarongiles.com/macsoft/index.html added by xy on Gardens comments
Quote
A very fast ZIP/UnZIP utility. Very simple interface. It was never finished, but is perfectly adequate for most simple ZIPping tasks.

Keep in mind that if you zip a file with resource fork, MacZip will preserve it the same way Mac OS X does, but you have to open it with MacZip or else the resource fork will show up as an useless file on a separate folder.

It could be interesting to find the last WinRAR/WinZIP version able to give OS9 files and to archive that.

Looking for MacOS 9.2.4

Offline Protools5LEGuy

  • Global Moderator
  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 2555
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 1151
Re: Other compression methods aside Stuffit
« Reply #2 on: January 19, 2015, 02:03:12 PM »
[suspicious]WinRAR 2.5 serial
Name: LawAbidngCriminalZ s/n: 8F2428F06BBA9[/suspicious]


http://www.gzip.org/

About Gzip 1.2.4
Quote
Important security patch
gzip 1.2.4 may crash when an input file name is too long (over 1020 characters). The buffer overflow may be exploited if gzip is run by a server such as an ftp server. Some ftp servers allow compression and decompression on the fly and are thus vulnerable. See technical details here. This patch to gzip 1.2.4 fixes the problem. The beta version 1.3.3 already includes a sufficient patch; use this version if you have to handle files larger than 2 GB. A new official version of gzip will be released soon.

MacGzip F.A.Q. http://persephone.cps.unizar.es/general/gente/spd/gzip/

Cool the used SuperLópez http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superl%C3%B3pez on logo

Quote
Can I use MacGzip to unzip .zip files with more than one file zipped in it?
No, you can't

Quote
Should I use (Mac)Gzip in order to exchange files with Windows users?

Usually gzip is used mostly by technical people; so, maybe your windows user won't have gzip for DOS nor gzip for Win 95/NT; probably they'll have WinZip, which understands gzip files.

Anyway, they will feel more comfortable if you use .zip files, which can be created on the Mac using ZipIt.

But Windows users should install StuffIt Expander for Windows, so they will be able to read the usual .sit files.

Gzip 1.2.4 for win http://www.nodc.noaa.gov/OC5/WOD05/utils05.html
« Last Edit: January 19, 2015, 02:24:10 PM by Protools5LEGuy »
Looking for MacOS 9.2.4

Offline IIO

  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 3743
  • just a number
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 175
Re: Other compression methods aside Stuffit
« Reply #3 on: January 20, 2015, 04:15:19 AM »
that old macrar app sucks, as it is not supported by most modern apps, especially it is incompatible with the "usual" *nix rar on OSX.

zipit is always compatible with other zip programs, and is very nice to distinguish between .zip and .sit by icons, because it is agressive enough to take .zip files the association to stuff it deluxe away.
insert arbitrary signature here

Offline Protools5LEGuy

  • Global Moderator
  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 2555
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 1151
Re: Other compression methods aside Stuffit
« Reply #4 on: January 20, 2015, 04:29:37 AM »
that old macrar app sucks, as it is not supported by most modern apps, especially it is incompatible with the "usual" *nix rar on OSX.


Yes, you are true. But Imagine this scenario: Win x86 machine with WinRAR 5 and WinRAR 2.5

There you could decode v.5 files, make them native (plain files) and then encode with WinRAR 2.5. In that way we could use MacRAR 2.5 on OS9. Maybe we can force WinRAR v.5 to make 2.5 compatible files.

The same workflow could happen with MacZIP or ZipIt.

This is like the DMG case in OS9. Some work and some don't. Let's find out why and how to make it work always.
that old macrar app sucks, as it is not supported by most modern apps, especially it is incompatible with the "usual" *nix rar on OSX.


What if we use the same OS9 native app to encode files on Classic environment (OSX compatibility mode)? It should be "more compatible" than using OSX "only" modern .ZIP

We also should look on the limits on the "Splitters" software. Maybe they do not support files bigger tha 2 Gig, but it worth looking. We use 2015 big files with 90's software. Probably the limit is HFS on the older one.

I know most of you are using Stuffit for more than 15 years... But I keep watching .zip files on Garden and even here.
« Last Edit: January 20, 2015, 04:40:59 AM by Protools5LEGuy »
Looking for MacOS 9.2.4

Offline IIO

  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 3743
  • just a number
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 175
Re: Other compression methods aside Stuffit
« Reply #5 on: January 20, 2015, 06:15:51 AM »
Quote
Yes, you are true. But Imagine this scenario:

i dont understand this scenario. 8)

but i agree with the idea that one should first of all, just in case, have all these free programs installed.

while i dont think anyone should make macrar archives, there can be no doubt that you need the app to unpack such archives.


Quote
What if we use the same OS9 native app to encode files on Classic environment

thats just my personal opinion / general advice: dont do anything releated to system in classic enviroment. if something is gong wrong, is it a real brainfuck to understand why. keep your classic enviroment clean and use it only for running apps.

Quote
We also should look on the limits on the "Splitters" software.

i dont know about the other formats, but we´ve ben using split and concat back in the days, because it is supported from OS 8.6 through OSX intel.


« Last Edit: January 20, 2015, 07:59:23 AM by IIO »
insert arbitrary signature here

Offline Protools5LEGuy

  • Global Moderator
  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 2555
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 1151
Re: Other compression methods aside Stuffit
« Reply #6 on: January 20, 2015, 07:57:25 AM »

i dont know about the other formats, but we´ve ben using split and concat back in the days, because it is supported from OS 8.6 through OSX intel.

I know Split and Concat from OSX PPC. Are the same than SplitIt or Split'n'Join?


i agree with the idea that one should first of all, just in case, have all these free programs installed.

while i dont think anyone should make macrar archives, there can be no doubt that you need the app to unpack such archives.


Agree. But If I have files in a partition that only OSX (below tiger) can see in a PPC machine, to use classic is not ideal, but plausible. We just have to find the right F.A.Q. of them to help "Classic" have good behavior.

Quote
gzip 1.2.4 may crash when an input file name is too long (over 1020 characters). The buffer overflow may be exploited if gzip is run by a server such as an ftp server. Some ftp servers allow compression and decompression on the fly and are thus vulnerable.

  If you have zip archive with filenames (for example) in ISO8859-2 code or other national codes, only MacZip can unpack it.
    Stuffit Expander and ZipIt surrend.



Looking for MacOS 9.2.4

Offline IIO

  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 3743
  • just a number
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 175
Re: Other compression methods aside Stuffit
« Reply #7 on: February 18, 2015, 05:56:33 PM »
Yes, you are true. But Imagine this scenario: Win x86 machine with WinRAR 5 and WinRAR 2.5
There you could decode v.5 files, make them native (plain files)

btw... in case we are talking about a mac os 9 application, you can not do that on windows. :)

but as i said, i dont think the scenarios you are talking about are realistic. unpacking a file which has been created on your avalble computer and OS is usualy not a problem.

what is far more interesting is the situation when you get a file from somewhere, which has been made using an OS and sofware you dont have.
insert arbitrary signature here

Offline IIO

  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 3743
  • just a number
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 175
Re: Other compression methods aside Stuffit
« Reply #8 on: February 18, 2015, 06:03:25 PM »
Agree. But If I have files in a partition that only OSX (below tiger) can see in a PPC machine, to use classic is not ideal, but plausible.

you dont need to use classic. that "macrar" program is available for OSX, too.
insert arbitrary signature here

Offline Protools5LEGuy

  • Global Moderator
  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 2555
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 1151
Re: Other compression methods aside Stuffit
« Reply #9 on: February 18, 2015, 06:33:33 PM »
Every time I see a RAR or ZIP file for a classic app I feel like playing http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_roulette
Looking for MacOS 9.2.4

Offline IIO

  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 3743
  • just a number
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 175
Re: Other compression methods aside Stuffit
« Reply #10 on: February 18, 2015, 08:07:59 PM »
it is just one click – but it could change everything :)
insert arbitrary signature here

Offline Protools5LEGuy

  • Global Moderator
  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 2555
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 1151
Re: Other compression methods aside Stuffit
« Reply #11 on: May 29, 2015, 05:00:55 PM »
Mat, read this.
Looking for MacOS 9.2.4

Offline IIO

  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 3743
  • just a number
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 175
Re: Other compression methods aside Stuffit
« Reply #12 on: May 29, 2015, 05:50:36 PM »
:)
insert arbitrary signature here

Offline Mat

  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 599
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Other compression methods aside Stuffit
« Reply #13 on: May 31, 2015, 08:30:28 AM »
Mat, read this.
Done. ;)

Well I didn´t know that there were changes in the rar format. And it is now clear to me why I never ran into problems using macrar, as I mainly use it to decompress older software and files, and do not (have to) interact/exchange files with recent X or Win computers.

Offline IIO

  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 3743
  • just a number
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 175
Re: Other compression methods aside Stuffit
« Reply #14 on: May 31, 2015, 03:12:29 PM »

so, on the other hand, you at least do something pretty right here, isnt it?

but what do you have to say for the mp4/iso containers of which you claim you can play  them in OS9? :)

 
insert arbitrary signature here

Offline Mat

  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 599
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Other compression methods aside Stuffit
« Reply #15 on: May 31, 2015, 09:17:35 PM »
but what do you have to say for the mp4/iso containers of which you claim you can play  them in OS9? :)

On my 9600 I had a quite good codec setup. QT MPEG-4 extension, Divx 5, 3ivx, Sorensen 3, xvid, i263 (for h.263), plus several audio codecs, and could play nearly any MP4 container.
I am not that deep into codecs, and of course the recent MPEG-4 standard is not fulfilled, but about 90 % of all MP4 videos I found on the net could be decoded. I was using this machine till mid. 2013 for watching movies quite often.

Doing mp4s with Premiere 5 was also no problem if I remember correctly (but I didn´t do it for 3 years now).

Offline IIO

  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 3743
  • just a number
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 175
Re: Other compression methods aside Stuffit
« Reply #16 on: June 01, 2015, 11:19:51 AM »

well from my experience the mp4 decoder for OS9 is more or less useless.

there are two mp4 formats: the first one was available from 2001-2003, and this format can be decoded on OS9.

the newer format, which is an iso container and is the current format from 2003-2015, uses H264, aac and apple lossless for about 99.9%.

i doubt there are decoders for those - but if am wrong then i will or course happily update my system folder. :)


insert arbitrary signature here

Offline Mat

  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 599
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Other compression methods aside Stuffit
« Reply #17 on: June 01, 2015, 03:19:35 PM »
As I told you, I am not that experianced with codecs. h264 is impossible as far as I know. AAC is part of QuickTime, and I belive there was an free additional codec as well, ... but for sure we will always run into problems with DRM formats, with every system beside recent Mac/Win, ... :(
no idea about apple lossless.

Offline adespoton

  • Enthusiast Member (25+ Posts)
  • ***
  • Posts: 38
  • Crusty Member
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: Other compression methods aside Stuffit
« Reply #18 on: July 15, 2020, 12:44:53 PM »
Just as a heads-up: https://www.gryphel.com/c/news/nva9.html

Paul Pratt is working on compiling a stripped down cross-platform version of The Unarchiver that will decompress old Stuffit archives no longer supported by modern Stuffit Expander:

Quote
It has been pointed out that the current version of Stuffit Expander no longer can deal with the two System 6.0.8 install disks from Apple. Which breaks the “Getting started with Mini vMac” documentation. Not Good.

I notice that one of my listed alternatives to Stuffit Expander, “The Unarchiver” for OS X, has command line versions for Windows and Linux. So I could change the documentation to make this the first choice, and mention old versions of Stuffit Expander in the alternatives.

But the command line version of The Unarchiver doesn’t seem to me all that well documented. And it deals with a very large number of formats, and so is quite large. Also it has changed location on the web several times, and changed ownership, so I suspect that if I link to it I may have to revisit this issue in not too many years.

But the command line version is open source. So I’m wondering how hard it would be to strip it down to a simple program that only deals with the two System 6.0.8 install disks and nothing else, written in C using only the standard library. I have already gotten it to compile in Linux, and figured out how to remove about half the source. I also figured out how to use the gcov tool to help identify the unused code. The question is whether this is a project of a week or two, or whether it would take months.

Of course, he's stripping out all the other formats and focusing on a tool that can unstuff the System 6.0.8 install disks, but this will likely be useful for some.  Might also be useful for adding some of those alternate modules back in, so we end up with a version of The Unarchiver for OS 9 that can expand RAR5, RAR4 and earlier, as well as LZMA, LZMAT, PKZIP, 7Zip, and even Compact Pro archives.

What I'd really like to see though is a decompressor that can identify the various AppleDouble, AppleSingle, etc. ways individuals have encoded resources and metadata into zip archives over the years, so that no matter which zip program compressed the archive, the resulting files come out as expected.

Offline IIO

  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 3743
  • just a number
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 175
Re: Other compression methods aside Stuffit
« Reply #19 on: July 15, 2020, 12:49:53 PM »
Quote
so that no matter which zip program compressed the archive, the resulting files come out as expected.

very good point. or at least identifies "incompatible" zip archives brought over from OSX or windows somehow - and throw an error.

as for 7z, that sometimes does not even work on OSX, there seems to be a bunch of different formats. and it is a horrible format to pack 50,000 files in one folder.
insert arbitrary signature here

Offline pmj

  • Enthusiast Member (25+ Posts)
  • ***
  • Posts: 56
  • New Member
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 30
Re: Other compression methods aside Stuffit
« Reply #20 on: March 19, 2021, 01:45:24 AM »
Question related to StuffIt in general... I was running StuffIt Deluxe 6.5.1 for a while and then changed to 7.0.3 so I could deal with files compressed in .sitx format.

In my extensions I now have “StuffIt Engine” from 6.5.1 and “StuffIt Engine Shell” from 7.0.3, am I causing any sort of conflict or doubling up there?  I’ve found turning off the “StuffIt Engine” still allows 7.0.3 to work so not sure if I need both extensions or not?

 


SimplePortal 2.3.6 © 2008-2014, SimplePortal