Stuffit?

The free Stuffit Expander is useful. It handles many formats in addition to Stuffit.

I used it prior to 10.6, but didn't bring it along with me. I haven't needed it. However, as Malcolm pointed out, Stuffit expander can expand lots of compression formats.

It's not needed but it is a very useful utility to have. You just never know when you'll need it.

Hello w:

OS X 10.6 has a built-in utility (archive) that handles zip files (most of the time). However, I have encountered zip files that need Stuffit to expand.

Answer, download the latest free Stuffit so you will have it if you ever have a problem with a zip file.

Barry

I have a slightly different perspective on this. Any decent Mac software these days will be either in a .zip file or a disk image (.dmg) file. If software is found inside a .sit or .sitx file, my interpretation is that the developer of that software knows squat about modern Macs, thus I probably don't want that software anyway. I'm not going to install StuffIt, which last time I used it stuck a whole bunch of other useless junk in my system (like a contextual menu plug-in), just for an occasional inexpertly-written bit of software!

Of course, if you find yourself frequently needing to open lots of other compressed file formats, StuffIt Expander might be the easiest option. It also might be needed if you absolutely must have the software. (For example, I once had to use it to get a printer driver installed... I had to open a .zip file, inside which was a .sit file, inside which was a .dmg file, inside which was an installer. The installer installed another compressed file (I forget what type), inside which was another installer, which finally installed the printer driver. Talk about software that I would have avoided if at all possible!)

my interpretation is that the developer of that software knows squat about modern Macs

Maybe they know something you don't? I certainly agree that having one compression format (zip) is nice to have across platforms, but I and my clients all use Stuffit because it greatly beats the pants off zip in file compression. We've tested it with TIFF, EPS and JPEG. Stuffit produces a much smaller file every time. It evens compresses all but the most highly compressed JPEGs by about 50%. Zip essentially just stores them. This saves a lot of time transferring the huge files we send across FTP.

Stuffit also protects the Mac file format far better than zip for an email or other transfer. Especially fonts.

Anyway, there's also the obvious plus for zip that it's built into the OS, so no extra cost is necessary for a compression utility. For most folks, the free Stuffit Expander is really all they need.

Maybe they know something you don't?

Possibly, but I used to be a software developer, so I'm far from ignorant in this area.

I and my clients all use Stuffit because it greatly beats the pants off zip in file compression.

That's an inadequate benefit for most software distributions. If your software requires a third-party product just to open the download, there are a lot of people out there who will never get it open. I guarantee that many Mac users these days have never heard of StuffIt and wouldn't have any clue what to do with a .sit file. (I've seen the queries here.)

If you have some kind of agreement with your clients to use specific compression software to speed large downloads, that's fine. But if you're selling downloads to average users, it's a bad idea.

Stuffit also protects the Mac file format far better than zip for an email or other transfer. Especially fonts.

I don't have experience with fonts, but I've never had zip damage a file. However, a compressed disk image file will not suffer from this issue and is transmissible all on its own, without needing any other encoding, and also does not need third-party software. So if a developer told me they had to use .sit to protect Mac metadata, I'd know right away that they didn't know what they were talking about. (Especially if they used .sit, which actually *does not* fully support Mac OS X files, rather than .sitx.)

Possibly, but I used to be a software developer, so I'm far from ignorant in this area.

Never said you were, but to say others don't know "squat about modern Macs" just because they use Stuffit implies that they are. Hardly a fair judgement.

That's an inadequate benefit for most software distributions.

And I agree, which is why I noted most users only need the free Expander for those Stuffit files they come across. For most distributions, the difference between something that was zipped or stuffed is going to be pretty small. May as well use the most common method to reduce confusion. Not that all users even get .dmg files all that well. Can't tell you how many people come here and ask why the "drive" disappears every time they restart. Or that yes, you have to dismount the pseudo drive before you can delete the .dmg file after you've installed the software that was in it.

(Especially if they used .sit, which actually does not fully support Mac OS X files, rather than .sitx.)

Yes, my mistake not to clarify. We always use .sitx. For those still distributing OS X software in the older .sit format, they are indeed pretty clueless.

We always use .sitx. For those still distributing OS X software in the older .sit format, they are indeed pretty clueless.

Ironically, the only StuffIt files I've seen in the last few years have all been .sit files. I've never yet seen a .sitx file "in the wild." I don't know what you're distributing, but I still stand by the statement that marketing .sit or .sitx files to average users who won't know what do do with them is a serious mistake that will cost sales.