3 ms·
Transparent compression on FS level is really usefull. HFS+ had that, and all modern FS have that. Be able to compress 1M text files of source code for example.
by diimdeep 9y ago
Transparent compression on FS level is really usefull. HFS+ had that, and all modern FS have that. Be able to compress 1M text files of source code for example.
- astrodust 9y agoI'm not sure the compressibility of files is really a factor these days. The largest files on your disk are probably either application software and associated libraries or some kind of media files which are already compressed. Not many people have a meaningful amount of raw text files sitting around on their system, and those that do can always create a compressed volume if they're so adamant about them being transparently compressed.
- kartickv 9y agoCompression is worth it if it saves even a GB on a 128 SSD, or a few hundred MB on a 16GB iPhone. In an alternate universe where all Macs come with at least 512GB storage, things might be different. Footnote: Apple still sells 16GB devices: http://www.amazon.in/Apple-iPhone-5s-Space-Grey/dp/B00FXLC9V4/ref=sr_1_1?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1496727189&sr=1-1&keywords=iphone http://www.amazon.in/Apple-iPhone-5s-Space-Grey/dp/B00FXLC9V...
- astrodust 9y agoAll new devices are 32GB+, so it's less and less of a concern each day, plus the sorts of media files that tend to clog up these devices (photos, video, music) are inherently incompressible. For 95% of users the space gains from compression in APFS are pretty much irrelevant.
- nicky0 9y agoBut you can't create a compressed volume with APFS, that's the point isn't it?
- astrodust 9y agoYou can create a compressed HFS+ volume that's stored on APFS if this is so critically important to you. Otherwise, deal.