FLAC vs ISO???

On OiNK, if you want to upload a perfect copy of a CD, they ban RAR'd ISO's, which to me makes no sense. They make you do a FLAC encode using Exact Audio Copy, under the justification that it makes the smallest files with no loss.

But I've measured RAR'ing an ISO copy I make from a CD, and it's only about 10% bigger than the FLAC hassle. Even EAC says it makes "just about" perfect copies.

But an ISO *IS* a perfect copy, isn't it? What is the justification for all this FLAC nonsense and opportunities for CRC errors just for 10%???

I dont understand your point. You must use FLAC because size is important. You cant RAR your ISO because noone wants to unrar everything they download to use it. RARd ISO being 10% bigger than FLAC has nothing to do with it. And lastly... who in their right mind want their computer music on an iso when they can have it in files which take up smaller space and can be immediatley loaded into player of your choice?

Many people only want to download individual tracks from some albums. I think that rule is an excellent one.

so do i think its excellent as a lot of albums may have some really crap tracks on em