More Awesome Than You!

I finally got around to perfecting my crude .zip file archiving method. The basics: it uses the two best .zip file archivers and mixes the results into one zip. It can be used from the command line (ie. zipocd c:\files\* done.zip; names with spaces need to be in quotes though) or just from double clicking; for simplicity's sake it also has a folder where you can just dump files and give the archive a name. Pretty self explanatory, it's pretty flexible and should catch most errors if they happen. Should work for OS X users too through DosBox (http://dosbox.sourceforge.net/).

Perhaps someone More Awesome Than Me can use it, or pillage it for something else. I've just been using it for my updates/official downloads archive, but it's worked well for .package files too.

Files:
zipocd.bat - What you run
7z.exe (http://www.7-zip.org/) - has a very good zip compressor.
kzip.exe (http://advsys.net/ken/utils.htm) - best known zip compressor but sometimes 7zip does better.
DeflOpt.exe (http://www.clrmame.com/download.htm#zipmax) - removes garbage from .zip files to save space. (it optimizes anything that uses Deflate, so png files work too)
zipmix.exe (http://advsys.net/ken/utils.htm) - compares two zip files, takes files compressed better in one and adds them to the other.
Files 2 Zip\ - just press enter at the folder screen if you dropped files in here.

Isn't DOSBox roughly 1% the speed of a modern machine nowadays? I once used it to unpack an obscure format, and it took freaking forever.  :P

Yeah it will be slower, but it's not too noticeable with the right settings (you can't leave it at the default settings). The CVS builds usually work better, there are a few that have an auto cycle option.

Isn't that kind of the point, seeing as an old machine is SUPPOSED to be that slow? If you emulated it faster, your emulated item would run at crazyfast, which is precisely the thing that DOSBox was meant to avoid.