A question about compression

[naughtydog2k3]

Hey fellas. Just got a question here about compressing iso's. So I hear ntsf is a better compression so I am curious but do I just compress the folder where my iso is in or do i compress the folder along with subfolder and such when giving that option? Just trying to clear out a confusion here I'm having.

[StriFe]

NTFS is Better mainly since it uses a block of 4 byte to put in data so let's say a .doc file is 3 byte it only has a 1 byte loss, compared with FAT32 whereas the smallest block size is 16 byte, thus having 13 byte loss.

[naughtydog2k3]

Um, that didn't exactly answer the question I was asking. Did you even read the question?

[vsub]

It's simple,if you choose the folder only,it will compress only the files inside the folder but placing anything in sub folders will not be compressed and if you choose sub folders too,placing files in sub folders will also be compressed.

If you are actually separate your images into different sub folders,then choose to apply the changes to the sub folders too and if not,there will be no difference if you enable either of the options

[naughtydog2k3]

Ah that's good to know vsub since I chose the one with subfolders, etc. Anyways thank you, that's all I needed to know

[Squall Leonhart]

NTFS is Better mainly since it uses a block of 4 byte to put in data so let's say a .doc file is 3 byte it only has a 1 byte loss, compared with FAT32 whereas the smallest block size is 16 byte, thus having 13 byte loss.

ntfs compression should not be used on the user documents that have frequent modifications, downloads folders or a boot drive.