Adriano dos Santos Fernandes wrote:

>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?
>
>
>

Because, as has been noted, you can't seek into a compressed file.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]