From: Rick (rick@ee.uwm.edu)
Date: 10/14/92 

From: rick@ee.uwm.edu (Rick "The Compression Crusader" Miller)
Subject: Re: Use of zip instead of compress
Date: 14 Oct 1992 18:43:27 GMT

Okay, it has come up again. The "Gosh! There sure is a *difference*!!"
compression algorithm debate. I'll just add my 'too sense' up front...

[un]compress Pro: This is (currently) the de-facto UNIX *STANDARD*.
                      Hey, it's not bad... it's just not that great.
                Con: Only does one file. Archiving requires 'tar'.

[un]zip Pro: Good compression (better than 'compress').
                      Archives multiple files/directories into one file.
                Con: <GUILT MODE ON> Phil Katz (the "PK" of PKWare) won't
                        be making any money by this use of his invention.
                ???: This is somewhat of a DOS standard. (Pro?/Con? :-)

lha Pro: Very good compression (better than 'zip').
(*not* 'lharc') Archives multiple files/directories into one file.
                      Placed in the public domain freely by the author.
                Con: The original 'man' page is in Japanese. (Though
                        every distribution I've seen includes enough
                        documentation in decent English to compensate.)

You choose.