Proper Encoding for Downloading Files

[l008com]

I'm making a classic mac software archive (see signature) and so far, I've just been reposting files as I get them. Meaning if they are .sit.bin, i post them as .sit.bin. If they are .sea.hqx, I post them as such. 

But it occurred to me that there is likely a "best" way to post files, but what way is the best?

I've found .hqx to be a little less problematic than .bin files for downloading on old browsers. Other than that, I don't know. Also, do you need to encode files that are in .sit format? Almost all .sit files are then .bin or .hqx encoded. But I've seen much newer software from the 2000's posted as .sit alone and they seem to download fine in modern browsers. 

I suspect there is no "right" answer to this question, but I'd like to hear people points of view on the topic. 

 

[Anonymous Freak]

I like the ancient-browser-friendly layout of your site!  If your web server software properly support resource forks, then .bin or .hqx would be best.  One big thing: If you're going to put Stuffit Expander on there, make sure it's a .sea.bin! I remember the nastiest of catch-22s, that the software to expand archives was transmitted in a format that required you already have software to expand archives.....  (Usually it was a loop - Stuffit Expander was in .hqx, but BinHex was in .sit. You needed to have one of the two in order to expand the other one.)

Proper age-appropriate web server software was capable of sending .bin files with their resource forks intact, so you could send a fully-ready-to-use Mac OS application; no archive software necessary.  But because of size constraints, .sit is the most logical one.  Add on .hqx if your web server software doesn't support resource forks.

Newer software sends in .sit because they knew that pretty much every new Mac from 1998 onward came with Stuffit Expander, and Stuffit knew how to handle "raw" .sit files without being .hqx'ed first, even if they were sent from a "bad" web server that stripped the resource forks.

 

[l008com]

How does posting stuffit in a .sit.bin solve the catch 22 problem? Don't you need expander to decompress a .hqx and a .bin? 

 

[olePigeon]

To solve the Catch 22 you have to host the Expander binary without stuffing or encoding it.  That typically requires a classic Mac with some sort of file service (http, ftp, etc.)

Might be possible to do it via a virtual machine as to not compromise the host machine.

 

[Paralel]

Why bother with .sit.bin? .sit can transit across modern systems without any trouble. I've downloaded plenty of .sit files to a windows system and brought them over to a 68k Mac without trouble.

 

[IPalindromeI]

Expander is pretty good about dealing with MacBinary and BinHex. I think some browsers (maybe just IE) can even do the decoding automatically.

It's worth noting Netscape's installer ships an Expander of at least 4.x. Most Stuffit archives are 5.x, but it's better than noting.

 

[olePigeon]

I like to use DropStuff 4.x for stuffing, and further encoding to MacBinary.  It's smaller than BinHex.