why the fuck do people still use WinRAR?

>>60309062
Habit.

>>60309062
Nicer UI than 7zip's.

>>60309062
Why the fuck do people still use shitty third party unarchiving programs that try to force a shitty UI that is way too complex for just unzipping one single item, then asking money for it?

>>60309062

>try to compress a folder with 7-zip
>use the Ultra preset compression
>use all of my 8 cores and 16 threads
>use 10GB of my 16GB ram
>takes many minutes
>same fucking file size as the source folder

oh geez idk

>>60309062
7-zip
right click on zip
extract here
winrar
right click on zip
extract here
extract in folder
extract wherever
etc

i had both installed and naturally came to use winrar

>>60309333
except it's never the same fucking size you waste of trips

>>60309232
some people actually like their files to compress

>>60309062
>not using bandizip

>>60309156
this desu, its most comfortable archive manager

File: filesizereduction.jpg?x58476.jpg (35KB, 580x420px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 580x420px

why do WinRAR users hate being efficient?

>>60309464
i don't archive my documents, and for like 0.1% and 0.5% difference i would prefer winrar's ultimate comfy UI instead of 7-shit

Unrar at least has a general description of the RAR archive format, while 7-Zip is entirely "documented" via its source code (there are text files, but they largely consist of structs copied from the source code).
http://www.rarlab.com/technote.htm

If you want to compress data using the LZMA algorithm, you should use lzip or plzip instead.

>>60309062
Recovery Record + better UI

>>60309062
I use both

>>60309362
7zip also does that, you memedip

>>60309614
This.
WinRAR has a more convenient UI but 7z does what WinRAR does, but better.
Kinda like Winamp vs new super mega up to date media player.
Winamp still plays it.
Old doesn't mean it's bad.

Am I the only one who uses 7zip because of the UI?

90% of the time I just want an archive file and don't care about 10% file size difference. But I tried to use winrar once and I simply cannot bear the 90s-style UI (in a bad way, not in a comfy way).

>>60309362
most importantly
>extract each archive into a separate folder

>>60309464
what about rar5?

Because I already paid for WinRar before I knew about 7z.

I use both.

>>60309464
>3.5%
How compact media file with better result?

ITT: People who never bothered to learn anything but WinZip

Basically the tech illiterates people green text about

>>60309156
How often do you actually use the UI?

File: 7zip.png (16KB, 406x532px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 406x532px

>>60309362

>>60309062
To create .rar archives just to piss people off because those are the hardest to decompress.

>>60311205
>How compact media file with better result?
media files are already compressed. there is no reason to compress them again.

>>60311281
He's asking how they made the media file smaller by compressing it.

File: tar.jpg (84KB, 620x432px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 620x432px

.*ar is a more proper archive format extension than .zip

>>60309232
>UI that is way too complex for just unzipping one single item

Then right click the archive? Or just drag it out of the fucking window?

>>60309062
Archive Integrity Checks. 7-Zip does not have this feature.

>>60309676
RAR5 has better compression.

>>60311269
that's nice but still no option to extract each archive into separate folder

>>60309062
I cracked it in 2008, I was very proud of it, so still use this crack.

>>60311218
Explain it to us then

Come on teach us anon-senpai

>>60309156
It's not

>>60311921
Alright, what do you want to know?

File: untitled.png (101KB, 1023x524px) Image search: [Google]

101KB, 1023x524px

>>60311808

File: aHR0cDovL21lZGlhLmJlc3RvZm1pY3JvLmNvbS9WL1cvMzc2OTg4L29yaWdpbmFsL1ppcFNjb3JlSFRPbjIucG5n.png (14KB, 450x307px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 450x307px

>>60309062
Literally no reason.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/winrar-winzip-7-zip-magicrar,3436.html

>>60311893
>tfw brainlet that uses CORE keygen from 2009 that still works with WinRAR 5.x

>>60309062
The same reason there are still people using IE as a browser: because they don't know any better.

>>60309062
why the fuck do people still use gzipped tape archives?

>>60309156
lmao pleb excuses, 7zip UI is actually much better for me
7zip is free, faster, opensource, while winrar you have to pay for inferior slower program, pathetic

>>60311876
>that's nice but still no option to extract each archive into separate folder
But that's exactly what "Extract to <Folder>" does.
Where <Folder> gets replaced by the archive name or */* depending on how many you selected in actual use.
Keep justifying your 40$ spent on that shitty meme software.

>>60309597
Recovery record in winrar was literally invented to help shitty downloads for users in third world countries. This shit just encourages idiots to upload broken archives, that's what torrents are for you retard.

>>60311293
by picking values from pi

>>60312752
>pay

>>60309333
> found the guy trying to compress compressed videos

Toast.

Because I can either install a pre-activated WinRAR, or I can very easily register it with a keygen or a .reg entry

>>60309062
Because my stepdad got me a copy for my birthday a couple years ago, and he asks me about it every couple weeks so I'd feel bad to lie to him if I switched

I use peazip instead, the UI is nicer than 7zip and it's also free.

>>60309062
Winrar is actually the fastest unzipper

Also has a much better interface than 7-zip

File: 7zip.png (33KB, 921x558px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 921x558px

>>60309156
UI looks fine to me.

>>60309062
tar -j
7z doesn't preserve timestamps

>>60312869
>she thinks mouse clicks are free

>>60311828
[Citation Needed]

Also, doesn't RAR uses a sort of VM for its compression? I remember reading about all sorts of exploits that can pwn you just by opening up a crafted .rar file.

>>60315908
I have yet to encounter a zip program that has a good GUI. 7-Zip is just the best though, in terms of compression and speed at least.

File: file.png (191KB, 635x329px) Image search: [Google]

191KB, 635x329px

>>60309062
Because 7Zip doesn't have this
<
https://sourceforge.net/p/sevenzip/discussion/45797/thread/9310115a/

>>60309333
back to the tard ward you imbecile

>>60309062
7-Zip doesn't have an option to remove redundant folders from the extraction path.

>>60316437
WinZip

>>60316334
>She thinks cracks don't exist

>>60316488
Meh. I can delete my own old archives

>>60316619
>failing to factor in the clicks needed to go through the crack

>>60316623
No, fuck that, there is little hassle to implement this.
Maybe you don't need it but many have said they do.
Ever tried to decompress some specific archives in a folder or many?
Or decompressing multipart archives in a folder of many different archives?

>>60316437
>7-Zip is just the best though, in terms of compression and speed at least.

Compression maybe, but not speed.

WinRAR unzips faster.

>>60309062
I don't. I use rar in Bash.

Why are you still on Windows?

>>60316547
It will remove the top level folder if it has a duplicate name. Is there more to it that you want/get elsewhere?

>>60309062
Am i the only that gets One drive spam everyone i open 7z?

>>60317030
Will it remove the top level folder even if the name isn't the same as the folder in it?

>>60309362
>extract wherever
WHAAAT?

File: 1474692488194.jpg (8KB, 265x265px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 265x265px

>>60309062
>extract .rar using 7zip
>get error at completion
>incomplete exraction
>use winrar instead
>just werks

7zip is great, for zip and 7z archives

grab a file

it's rared

MOREOVER IS RAR5

Can't fucking open that shit. RARJEWS should die.

People ITT comparing UIs. I don't fucking even use the UI. Not once. I always right-click and extract/compress. 7-Zip 100% of the time. Who the fuck uses a UI to extract files? I thought this was /g/.

they're either stupid or use it ironically

They're all garbage until they can implement multi-thread decompression.

File: MS_Paint_Elephant_just_huffed_spraypaint.png (19KB, 650x650px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 650x650px

Can't wait till 7zip and WinRAR switch to a new gui written in electron

>>60317449
I think there are two tick boxes. One for the duplicate folder and another next to the default folder name which you can disable. I *think* that gets rid of a top folder, but it's not very clear

Hi please purchase winrar after using for the trial for 40 days, thanks!

i use winrar because the secret russian torrent site i use to download very specific things only open with winrar

>>60311876

> extract to <folder>

Anyways, not a big deal if you prefer something else.

File: nice_encoding_switcher.jpg (12KB, 599x54px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 599x54px

7zip refuses to add any fucking encoding switcher so anything archived in something like shift_jis turns to garbage. WinRAR is superior for that alone.

i only use 7z when sharing things with windows users
otherwise i use lrzip or squashfs

>>60317990
>7z library: 2.3M
>gui: 130M
good plan

>>60309156
>archive manager with gui
That's a cool thing brau :^)

>>60312611
>2013

>>60309333
Anything higher than the "fast" preset is a waste of resources

>ctr+f peazip
>only one result
wew what a bunch of plebs

>>60317592
You got a corrupted file.

>>60317089
>he fell for Windows 10

>>60309333
Oys almost like the act of examining fuck loads of data to find suitable patterns to generate a reliable file that compresses the dats reliably might use some computing power.

If you horse wankers actually sat down and learned how file compression is performed, you would not make stupid comments like that.

>>60321562
Should you really have to learn compression just to compress a file though? It's nice if you don't have to concern yourself at all with learning how each compression algorithm works.

>>60321608
Most file formats that end users interact with already are compressed

I'll never do that shit again.

Files:
Crash Bash (USA).bin - 178.220.448 bytes
Crash Bash (USA).cue - 82 bytes

>Tests

7zip Default (7z)
Compression: 24.57s - 50.035.443 bytes
Extraction: 3.98s

7zip - Ultra (7z)
Compression: 33.53s - 49.519.437 bytes
Extraction: 3.98s

Winrar - Default (rar)
Compression: 11.31s - 62.514.323 bytes
Extraction: 1.67s

Winrar - Best (rar) [RAR]
Compression: 12.71s - 62.465.605 bytes
Extraction: 1.73s

Winrar - Best (rar) [RAR5]
Compression: 16.93s - 57.339.318 bytes
Extraction: 1.37s

7zip Default (zip)
Compression: 14.43s - 76.422.244 bytes
Extraction: 1.73s

7zip Ultra (zip)
Compression: 98.51s - 75.635.649 bytes
Extraction: 1.91s

Winrar Default (zip)
Compression: 4.58s - 77.478.073 bytes
Extraction: 1.43s

Winrar Best (zip)
Compression: 6.13s - 77.447.878 bytes
Extraction: 1.51s

>Other

7zip - (rar) [Winrar's RAR - Default]
Extraction: 1.83s

7zip - (rar) [Winrar's RAR5 - Default]
Extraction: 1.46s

Winrar - (7z) [7zip's Default]
Extraction: 4.03s

7zip has a beard that's why,

Rars are infinitely more common and WinRAR handles opening them better than 7zip does.

That's about all there is to it. If I packaged more shit myself I would jump to 7zip, but I'd still wind up using WinRAR for opening archives because it's the superior option in reliability and features.

>>60321925
>those compression times
I think I know why people use Winrar now.

>>60321724
How often are archives used for just compression vs packaging multiple files though?

>>60322003
When you just want to pack files you turn off compression and "store" files (in 7zip) or alternatively use .tar

>>60321067
It depends on what you're compressing.

I have many copies of a certain video game, all different versions. Each copy is around 10k files and around 100MB, but only some files change between versions. I end up with 150k files at 2.7GB. With the default 'fast' settings, 7zip can't handle this volume of data and creates an enormous file. With finely tuned settings, the output file is 110MB.

when RAR will be Open Source?

>>60321992
The difference is negligible. See >>60321960

>>60322001
The end result is a 4-8% smaller tho

>>60322086
This. That's the reason fullsets are using .7z now.

File: Untitled.png (19KB, 424x334px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 424x334px

>>60322122
I'm not just talking about solid compression. RAR can do that, too. I was talking about how the 'fast' setting is not always the right choice.

Also, to append to my previous post, I was actually looking at an old version of my archive. The current one is 320k files totaling 5.7GB, compressed to 250MB.

>>60321960
i'll add a couple i use
also crash bash (u)

reference time;
7z, default
enc: 12.596s
dec: 3.604s

lrzip, lzma (designed more for large input, long-range pattern matching)
enc: 9.583s
dec: 1.952s
size: 50066938

lz4 (fast as shit)
enc: 0.520s
dec: 0.387s
size: 92928522

squashfs, xz mode (mountable filesystem, don't need to extract it to play some crash bash)
enc: 6.463s
dec: 0.910s
size: 69992448

>>60321960
Forgot my specs:
Windows 7
i3 2370M
4GB DDR3
500GB WD Blue

>>60322199
What's the original file size?

>>60322313
178220448, same as yours
here's the sha1 if you want to be certain it's identical

fce2d66a12d49ec50aa1b93e138da6c6f646eb16

only counting the .bin as the 82 byte .cue isn't really significant

if you have fucktons of ram, increase the dictionary size in both 7zip and winrar.
I use 3 cores and 512mb dictionary, a game mod i'm working on compresses from 19GB to 468MB

>>60309062
>what is tar -zcf or tar -zxf

>>60316488
Yeah but Peazip erases it completely.

>>60309062
I don't know. I compress and extract my files myself.

File: winrar.png (10KB, 785x375px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 785x375px

depends on the task I guess, I did this in '14 with over 10,000 office documents.

>>60317662
>I only use archives for petty little files
a 50+GB virtual machine doesn't extract so easily - drag and drop will always extract to the system temp folder because of how Windows passes the target path to the unarchiver

So you have to actually open the archive and extract from there if you want to avoid double writing data

>>60309156
spbp

>>60322822
Winrar does this too, i choosed to confirgure it to get a confirmation box before deleting.

File: 1492643709551.jpg (174KB, 509x501px) Image search: [Google]

174KB, 509x501px

>>60316398
>I remember reading about all sorts of exploits that can pwn you just by opening up a crafted .rar file.

[Citation Needed]

not even that guy so dont talk shit

RAR is Russian and therefore unreliable and unpatriotic

>>60309062
Because it just werks.

>>60309464
Wow, it's really great that I can compress my 68kb word document by an additional ten percent. That will make all the difference. That's definitely worth switching to a format that most recipients won't have a clue how to open

File: IMG_20170511_121118.jpg (244KB, 1080x1180px) Image search: [Google]

244KB, 1080x1180px

>>60321077
>Peazip
Enjoy your bundled OpenCandy malware

used to the icon
can i setup an icon for .7z files? never checked that

>>60325790
Nice try but that was removed years ago.

http://www.peazip.org/peazip-partnership.html

>>60309885
OMG he exist!

>>60325877
xD upboated

>>60312777
why would you imply that he bought it

>>60317601
then update 7zip you pleb

File: HIDEOUS.jpg (24KB, 218x145px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 218x145px

I actually wondered why am I still clinging to winrar. So I finally decided to end this relationship forever.

Now what I got is the taste of freedom and backwards 90s-stuck icons.

But on a more serious note: the only issue for me is lack of archive testing option.

I didnt find an option to select a group of files and mass zip every file in its own zip.
winrar provides a checkbox for this.
7zip doesnt provide shit and my google-fu regarding command line wizardry gave me no results.

>>60309062
nigga, WinRAR has a much better-looking UI, more options when it comes to extracting files. 7-zip is really basic.

File: WinRARnigga.png (139KB, 1010x567px) Image search: [Google]

139KB, 1010x567px

>>60309062
Better options.

>use 7zip
>be able to open even split vmdk disks
what's the point of winrar?

>>60316398
Oh Boy. Clearly you haven't heard of the 7zSfx modified module. Create malware much!!

>>60321161
nah, winrar extracts it correctly. 7zip just sucks for rars

why would you change something that work.

File: IMG-20170510-WA0007.jpg (44KB, 320x240px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 320x240px

>>60309362
>right click
>extract here
>Done
>Faggot

>>60311539
this

>>60318522
Nah, that's zip's problem you retard. There is NO standard to implement utf8/16 for zip and every solution is an island solution that works differently and expects different things. Just because your packi winrar implements one of them doesn't mean 7zip should do the same because that one will still not work on any other unzip program. Use the format designed with utf8 in mind and you won't have that problem or find out how to extract with changed locale.

>>60326778
PEAZIP

>>60326543
Why else would someone shill closed source software that only works on the operating system the programmer wants you to?

>>60316398
>>60325497
http://blog.cmpxchg8b.com/2012/09/fun-with-constrained-programming.html
The VM code is pretty easy to find in the unrar source code.

This was at least reported and fixed in malware scanners (which don't necessarily use the original unrar library).
https://www.cvedetails.com/cve/CVE-2007-3725/
https://community.sophos.com/kb/en-us/118424#six

I feel a bit more uneasy now, although open-source compressors like zpaq also include bytecode algorithms for decompressors to execute.

>>60312752
>pay
No you don't. Not paying only gives up that popup. Other than that, you can use it forever without paying.

>>60312752
>>60316334
>>60316619
>>60316774
>>60327692
>not just applying the registration key
https://pastebin.com/KmkRpdEC

File: Untitled.png (16KB, 854x206px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 854x206px

>>60311205
>>60311281
>>60311293
packMP3 and packJPG

so uh, how does one exclude file types from compression in 7zip?

File: meanwhile a decade later.png (34KB, 748x465px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 748x465px

>>60328440

File: 7z.png (10KB, 275x461px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 275x461px

>>60326911
What do you mean?

File: offsite backup.png (95KB, 1000x994px) Image search: [Google]

95KB, 1000x994px

who knew compression was depreciated?

bump because file compression is neat stuff

>>60326727
Open the file, there is a big "V" button with Test written under it.

>>60330737
people on /g/ only know about nvidia vs amd, amd vs intell and windows vs linux.

If you want a nice discussion, encode.ru.

>be on techboard
>faggots talking about compression
>cmd+f
>zstd
>0 hits

>>60309062
Because 7-zip doesn't have an option to get rid of useless folders.

archive.zip contains folder/file.txt

7-zip - right click, extract to <folder>:
archive/folder/file.txt

Winrar - right click, extract to <folder>:
folder/file.txt

File: 1.png (4KB, 384x42px) Image search: [Google]

4KB, 384x42px

7zip dosent have this option.

So what's the deal with bzip2 anyway? I've tried it a few times and it seems to be inferior to LZMA in most cases but it does unusually well for text documents and images. Is there some reason it's not used for much?

>>60332876
it has the unusual property of taking just as long to decode as it does to encode

>>60332611
Total Commander™

File: Untitled.png (2KB, 237x108px) Image search: [Google]

2KB, 237x108px

>>60332655
my 7z have

File: fags-are-jealous.png (51KB, 1377x597px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 1377x597px

Just bought WinRar today, you jelly?

>>60333633
i can see your license on this email, becareful

>>60333713
Don't be jealous

>>60333587
But.. but.. "Extract to *\" is too complicated!

>>60333633
No, but if I was in your shoes right now I would be sad.

>>60327761

>>60309156
Most of the archiver usages are committed via context menu.