Windows file system compression had to be dumbed down

Re:Windows file system compression had to be dumbed down by striking on Tuesday November 01, 2016 @02:13PM (#12848650)

To upgrade my storage capacity, I can... double my SSD space. Which costs $100 (from 256GB to 512GB). That's the equivalent of upgrading from an RX 480 8GB to an nVidia GTX 1070 8GB.

I don't know about you, but I have better things to spend money on than storage that could otherwise be slightly further compressed. I'd rather wait a couple seconds longer and burn my money on upgrading the graphical fidelity of my machine.

Better yet, I could buy 3-10 games on Steam on sale for that money. Do you still think that's a worthwhile upgrade? Or would you rather wait another 3 extra seconds for every level reload in your game?

If you have more money than time, you could always disable compression. My problem is that I can't enable any sort of good compression and I'm broke.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Windows file system compression had to be dumbed down by khedoros1 on Tuesday November 01, 2016 @04:21PM (#12849710)

We're obviously at different places in life. I'll always go for the larger storage options, for reasons of time and convenience. The cost is reasonable, and I'll get the benefits for the entire time that I have the hardware.

3 seconds extra between levels, plus 20 seconds during the initial engine load, plus 5 seconds closing down the app, etc...Time adds up. If I've got half an hour available to play a game, I want to get in+out fast. My SSD can stream data faster than my CPU can decompress it. Why would I want to handicap the hardware that I paid good money for?

On the other hand, 15 years ago, I remember shifting data around to fit on my 20GB hard drive, doing the minimum install and running games from the CD to save disk space. My priorities would've been a lot different, then.

[ Parent | on HN ]