Jim Starkey wrote:

>The most stupid of compression schemes has at most a trivial cost when
>compressing the uncompressible. And if the compression scheme didn't,
>we could, trivially.
>
>So rather than reject every idea out of hand, why not use your brain to
>see how it could work?
>
>

Let's see from the operating system POV.

If compression is so good, for all cases, including already compressed
files (that haven't cost, as you say), why the OS don't store all files
compressed?


Adriano