#####################################
                  # ARCHIVER FEATURE COMPARISON CHART #
                  #       David Daniel Anderson       #
                  #####################################

Below is my first attempt at cataloging the strengths and weaknesses of
over two dozen file archivers.  Let me know if you have any comments,
corrections, or anything to add!  My comments follow the chart.

I've cataloged five advantages and five disadvantages for each archiver.
Each feature is weighted equally: one point added for an advantage, and
one point taken away for a disadvantage.  Thus, the range is -5 to +5.

Here is a guide to the categories on my chart:

Advantages (each "+" adds one star):
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
  Free: If payment is not required or "strongly URGED" for personal use.
        If payment is required, I've given the single user registration
        amount in US dollars.
  Tiny: If it compresses at least 10% tighter than PKZIP v2.
  Fast: If it compresses about as fast as, or faster than PKZIP v2.
  New:  If the program has had a release since the autumn of 1992.
  3rd:  If the program has third-party support (e.g. SHEZ).

Disadvantages (each "-" subtracts one star):
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
  Bad:  If it has a nag screen (AIN) or if the archiver lacks backward
        compatibility (ACB).
  Big:  If it compresses at least 10% looser than PKZIP v2.
  486:  If it needs a super-powerful PC, large amounts of RAM,
        or only runs well under Windows 95 or OS/2.
  Dir:  If it doesn't compress subdirectories (or does, but oddly).
  ex1:  If it can't extract just a single file from an archive.

=======================================================================
 Archiver   |  |      Advantages      |  |   Disadvantages   |  |     |
 name and   |  |======================|  |===================|  |     |
 version    |  |Free|Tiny|Fast|New|3rd|  |Bad|Big|486|Dir|ex1|  |Total|
============|  |====|====|====|===|===|  |===|===|===|===|===|  |=====|
 ACB   1.17a|  |(50)| +  | +  | + | . |  | - | . | - | . | - |  |   0 |
 AIN   2.2  |  |(20)| .  | +  | + | . |  | - | . | . | . | . |  |    *|
 ARJ   2.50a|  | +  | .  | +  | + | + |  | . | . | . | . | . |  | ****|
 CODEC 3.10 |  | +  | .  | +  | + | . |  | . | . | . | . | . |  |  ***|
 DWC   5.01 |  | +  | .  | +  | . | . |  | . | - | . | - | . |  |   0 |
 HA   0.999á|  | +  | +  | .  | + | . |  | . | . | . | . | . |  |  ***|
 Hap   3.00 |  |(20)| +  | +  | + | + |  | . | . | . | - | . |  |  ***|
 HPACK .79a0|  | +  | .  | +  | + | . |  | . | . | . | . | . |  |  ***|
 HYPER 2.5  |  | +  | .  | +  | . | . |  | . | - | . | . | . |  |    *|
 JRchive 1.1|  |(29)| .  | +  | + | . |  | . | - | . | - | . |  |   0 |
 LARC  3.33 |  | +  | .  | +  | . | . |  | . | - | . | . | . |  |    *|
 LHA   2.13ÿ|  | +  | .  | +  | + | + |  | . | . | . | . | . |  | ****|
 LIMIT 1.2  |  | +  | .  | +  | + | . |  | . | . | . | . | . |  |  ***|
 PAK   2.50 |  |(15)| .  | +  | . | + |  | . | - | . | . | . |  |    *|
 PKARC 3.5  |  | +  | .  | +  | . | + |  | . | - | . | - | . |  |    *|
 PKPAK 3.61 |  | +  | .  | +  | . | + |  | . | - | . | - | . |  |    *|
 PKZIP 2.04g|  | +  | .  | +  | + | + |  | . | . | . | . | . |  | ****|
 PUT   3.34 |  |(19)| .  | +  | + | . |  | . | . | . | - | . |  |    *|
 Quantum .96|  | +  | +  | .  | + | . |  | . | . | . | . | - |  |   **|
 RAR   2.00á|  |(35)| +  | +  | + | + |  | . | . | . | . | . |  | ****|
 SAR   1.0  |  |(28)| .  | +  | + | . |  | . | . | . | - | . |  |    *|
 SqzIt 1.083|  | +  | .  | +  | + | + |  | . | . | . | . | . |  | ****|
 UC2   3.0  |  | +  | +  | +  | + | + |  | . | . | . | . | . |  |*****|
 X1    0.94c|  | +  | +  | +  | + | . |  | . | . | - | . | . |  |  ***|
 YAC   1.02 |  | +  | +  | .  | + | . |  | . | . | . | . | . |  |  ***|
 ZOO   2.10 |  | +  | .  | +  | . | + |  | . | - | . | - | . |  |    *|
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Once you have studied the chart, I suspect you'll start thinking that
some of these items aren't very important to you.  For example, you may
not care about compression speed, or third-party support.

You'll be thinking "if I disregard the `Fast' and `3rd' categories, then
HA and YAC are among the top compressors available."  You'd be correct;
they are excellent compressors, just a little slow.

I encourage you to play around with the ratings in this manner!  Create
additional categories if you like!  This is just my first draft of some
features that I have noticed while I've been writing my "FACT" archive
conversion program.

On my chart, Ultra Compressor II is the only compressor which merits a
full five star rating.  Does that mean it is the best?  Maybe, or maybe
not.  The "best" compressor is the one that suits your needs.  I prefer
RAR, but I also like UC2 enough to have registered both RAR and UC2.

Only you can decide what compressor you should use.  I hope my chart can
help you decide.

DDA (dda@panasia.com)