SPONSORED LINKS
I had a 340 where I installed SuperStor. It didn't work right with the power management and the local IBM office advised to take it off.
I put the win95 and its compression on and have had no problems. Slow with 4Mb, a bit faster with 8Mb.
Good Luck, Tom
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
FROM:Tom Trottier, MBA Senior Technical Architect
SHL Systemhouse Ltd. Ottawa Global Development Centre
50 O'Connor St. Suite 501, Ottawa K1P 6L2 Canada
+1 613 236-6604x5539 fax 232-5182 ttrottier@shl.com
----------
From: Ron_Yee@altabates.com[SMTP:Ron_Yee@altabates.com]
Sent: 1997 June 25 - Wednesday 13:42
To: thinkpad@cs.utk.edu
Subject: Stacker vs. SuperStor/DS
I'm relatively new to PC's, and have a general question about data
compression:
I have a 701C running PC-DOS 6.22/Win 3/1, and I've almost filled the
small (340mg) HD. SuperStor/DS is on the drive, but not yet
installed. I can pick up a copy of Stacker 3.1 for next to nothing at
a local store. What are the functional differences between Stacker
and SuperStor/DS, especially regarding processor overhead and
slowdown? I know that the degree of slowdown varies, but in general
percentage terms, how much of a performance hit should I expect (I use
the machine primarily for WP, spreadsheets, communications and some
minor retouching and viewing of graphics)? Finally, does anyone have
any advice or recommendations regarding install and use of these apps?
Thanks in advance....