Welcome to MSFN

Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to contribute to this site by submitting your own content or replying to existing content. You'll be able to customize your profile, receive reputation points as a reward for submitting content, while also communicating with other members via your own private inbox, plus much more! This message will be removed once you have signed in.


Guest

WinRAR 5 WOW!

20 posts in this topic

****! Look at the difference.

lFsZRPJ.png

I compressed an XP installation that's on my second hard drive. Set everything to maximum in WinRAR on both runs. Obviously used the WinRAR 5 format for WinRAR 5.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No matter how unimportant tens of megabytes difference is in today's world, this is an impressive result.

I am actually waiting for the moment I have extra money so I can get WinRAR legally at last and get back to it. I was using it pretty much since early 2.x versions, and switched to 7-zip about two years ago after feeling guilty. That program might compress well, but the GUI is crap, and the whole development process is a joke.

Edited by TheWalrus
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

****! Look at the difference.

lFsZRPJ.png

I compressed an XP installation that's on my second hard drive. Set everything to maximum in WinRAR on both runs. Obviously used the WinRAR 5 format for WinRAR 5.

Thanks for the report!

Any other changes worth considering? Features missing, GUI differences, licensing?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Update, 7-Zip still beats it but WinRAR 5 got better. I left some maximum settings off. I turned them on and redid it.

Here shows 7-Zip and the new WinRAR 5 size.

rErGRIU.png

Old one again...

lFsZRPJ.png

@CharlotteTheHarlot, here's the changelog. GUI is the same. A lot of people hate it's dated look but I don't mind it.

It just nags you if you haven't purchased it I guess.

                WinRAR - What's new in the latest version   Version 5.00   1. New RAR 5.0 archiving format. You can use "RAR 5.0" option      in archiving dialog or -ma command line switch to create      RAR 5.0 archives.            Older software including older WinRAR versions is not able to      decompress RAR 5.0 archives, so if you plan to send an archive      to other people, it is necessary to take the compatibility issue      into consideration. You can select "RAR" instead of "RAR5" option      in archiving dialog to create RAR 4.x archives compatible with      previous WinRAR versions.   2. Changes in RAR 5.0 compression algorithm:      a) maximum compression dictionary size is increased up to 1 GB         in 64 bit WinRAR. 32 bit WinRAR version can use up to 256 MB         dictionary when creating an archive. Both 32 bit and 64 bit         versions can unpack archives with any dictionary size,         including 1 GB;      b) default dictionary size for RAR 5.0 is 32 MB, typically resulting         in higher compression ratio and lower speed than RAR 4.x 4 MB.         You can use "Dictionary size" archiving dialog option or -md<size>         switch to change this value;      c) -md<size> switch syntax is modified to support larger dictionary         sizes. Append 'k', 'm' and 'g' modifiers to specify the size         in kilo-, mega- and gigabytes, like -md64m for 64 MB dictionary.         If modifiers are not present, megabytes are assumed,         so -md64m is equal to -md64;      d) RAR 5.0 format includes Intel IA-32 executable and delta         compression algorithms, but RAR 4.x text, audio, true color         and Itanium algorithms are not supported. These excluded algorithms         are not efficient for modern data types and hardware configurations;      e) RAR 5.0 decompression can utilize several CPU cores.         Though not to same extent as in compression algorithm,         it improves the decompression speed on large files         with poorly compressible data or when using BLAKE2 checksums.   3. Changes in RAR 5.0 archive format:      a) file times are stored as Coordinated Universal Time (UTC)         instead of former local time, making file exchange among         several time zones more straightforward;      b) file names and archive comments use UTF-8 encoding.      4. RAR 5.0 recovery record is based on Reed-Solomon error correction      codes. If recovery record size is large enough, 5% and more,      the new error correction scheme provides much higher resistance to      multiple damages comparing to RAR 4.x recovery record.      Smaller record, such as 1 - 2%, or less random damage type would      result in less difference between 4.x and 5.0. For single continuous      damage 4.x and 5.0 efficiency is about the same.      Additionally to usual data erasures, the new recovery record      is able to detect deletions and insertions of much larger size      than in previous RAR versions. Maximum insertion size is several      megabytes. Maximum deletion size depends on the damage type      and in some cases can be as large as the recovery record size.            Still, the best recovery performance and efficiency is achieved      if no deletions and insertions are present, so all data including      damaged sectors preserve their original positions. Thus, if you use      some special software to copy an archive from damaged media,      it is better to choose the mode, when damaged sectors are filled by      zeroes or any other data instead of cutting them out completely      from resulting file.      RAR 5.0 recovery record is more resistant to damage of recovery record      itself and can utilize a partially corrupt recovery record data.      Note, though, that "Repair" command does not fix broken blocks      in recovery record. Only file data are corrected. After successful      archive repair, you may need to create a new recovery record      for saved files.      New recovery record is not based on 512 byte sectors anymore       and incorporates more complicated data structures. So it is impossible      to specify its size in sectors. For RAR 5.0 archives the parameter of      -rr[N] switch and rr[N] command is always treated as a percent of      archive size regardless of presence of % character. Typically N%      recovery record can repair up to N% of continuously damaged data      and increases the archive size by only slightly more than N%.      Ability to fix multiple damages is proportional to N.      We used "Screaming Fast Galois Field Arithmetic Using Intel      SIMD Instructions" paper by James S. Plank, Kevin M. Greenan      and Ethan L. Miller to improve Reed-Solomon coding performance.      Also we are grateful to Artem Drobanov and Bulat Ziganshin      for samples and ideas allowed to make Reed-Solomon coding      more efficient.   5. "Test" command verifies validity of RAR 5.0 recovery record.      Recovery record is tested after processing all archived files.      If corrupt archive contains the recovery record, it might be possible      to repair it even if recovery record validity test is failed.      "Repair" command attempts to utilize even a partially damaged      recovery record. So treat the negative recovery record test result      as a reason to re-create the archive if original files are still      available, but not as a reason to avoid "Repair" command.   6. Changes in RAR 5.0 encryption algorithm:      a) encryption algorithm is changed from AES-128 to AES-256 in CBC mode.         Key derivation function is based on PBKDF2 using HMAC-SHA256;      b) special password verification value allows to detect most of         wrong passwords without necessity to unpack the entire file;      c) if archive headers are not encrypted ("Encrypt file names" option         is off), file checksums for encrypted RAR 5.0 files are modified         using a special password dependent algorithm, to make impossible         guessing file contents based on checksums. Do not expect such         encrypted file checksums to match usual CRC32 and BLAKE2 values.      7. RAR 5.0 archives allow to utilize 256 bit length BLAKE2sp hash      ( https://blake2.net ) instead of 32 bit CRC32 as a file checksum.      Enable "Use BLAKE2 file checksum" option in "Options" page of      archiving dialog or specify -htb command line switch to use BLAKE2      checksums.      While producing slightly larger archives, BLAKE2 can be used      for file contents identification. If two files have the same      BLAKE2 value, it practically guarantees that file contents      is the same. BLAKE2 error detection property is also stronger      than in much shorter CRC32.   8. Features removed:      a) authenticity verification feature did not provide the required         level of reliability and was removed;            b) switch -en (do not add "end of archive" block) is not supported         by RAR 5.0 archives, which always have the end of archive block.         This block helps WinRAR to safely skip external data like         digital signatures appended to archive;      c) old style extension based arcname.rNN volume names are not         supported by RAR 5.0 archives, which use only arcname.partN.rar         volume names;            d) file comments are not supported anymore both in RAR 4.x         and RAR 5.0 archives. Console RAR 'cf' command is removed.         It does not affect the archive comment support, which is present         in both versions of archive format and is not planned for removal.   9. "Set password" command and "Dictionary size" option are moved to      "General" page of archiving dialog.     10. You can use "Save symbolic links as links" option on "Advanced" page      of archiving dialog to save and restore NTFS symbolic links      and reparse points as links, so their contents is not archived.      Command line equivalent of this option is -ol switch.      Similar option for NTFS hard links is "Save hard links as links".      Its command line equivalent is -oh switch.      Both options are available only for RAR 5.0 archive format.     11. Added extraction only support for XZ archive format.     12. Changes in recovery volume processing in RAR 5.0 archive format:      a) maximum number of RAR+REV volumes in RAR 5.0 format is 65535         instead of 255;      b) recovery volume operations are faster than in RAR 4.x;      c) additionally to recovery data, RAR 5.0 REV files also store         service information such as checksums of protected RAR files.         So they are slightly larger than RAR volumes which they protect.         If you plan to copy individual RAR and REV files to some removable         media, you need to take it into account and specify RAR volume         size by a few kilobytes smaller than media size.    13. Maximum path length for files in RAR and ZIP archives is increased      up to 2048 characters.    14. Command line RAR returns the exit code 11 if it can detect that      user entered a wrong password. This code can be returned only      for RAR 5.0 archives. It is impossible to distinguish a wrong      password and data damage for RAR 4.x archives.  15. 'v' and 'l' commands display archived file names in the end of line,      not in that beginning as before. Also some fields previously      available in 'l' and 'v' output are now shown only by 'lt' and 'vt'.            'vt' and 'lt' commands provide the detailed multiline information      for every archived file.      'vta' and 'lta' also include service headers into list.   16. Now the default charset for filelists in commands like       'rar a arcname @filelist' is ANSI for both WinRAR and console RAR.       In previous versions it was ANSI for WinRAR and OEM for console RAR.       You can use -sc<charset>l switch to override this default.   17. Internal WinRAR viewer can detect and display files in UTF-8       and UTF-16 little endian encodings.   18. UTF-16 little endian encoding is used in RAR and WinRAR log file       rar.log, so Unicode file names are stored in the log correctly.       WinRAR automatically truncates the old rar.log file in non-Unicode       format to avoid mixing different encoding in the same log file.       In case of console RAR you need to delete the old rar.log manually,       otherwide RAR will append UTF-16 messages to existing rar.log.       You can use -sc<charset>g switch to change the default log file       encoding, such as -scag for ANSI encoding.   19. Command line 'r' (repair) command can include an optional destpath\       parameter defining the destination folder for repaired archive:       rar r archive.rar destpath\
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm.

If you are looking for "tight" compression, try a few "tight" compressors (command line only), like those PAQ8 based or Nanozip.

http://dhost.info/paq8/

http://www.nanozip.net/

Or, if you *need* the GUI the (Commercial) WinRK is still the tighter compression available:

http://www.msoftware.biz/products/winrk

Comparison:

http://www.maximumcompression.com/data/summary_mf.php

but do check also compression and decompression times, overall I do use 7-zip because it is Free and it doubles as an (almost) orthodox dual pane file manager, but if I had to make a choice today it would probably be FreeArc:

http://freearc.org/Default.aspx

http://www.maximumcompression.com/data/summary_mf2.php

We will need to wait some time for those comparisons to take into account WinRAR5, but since it has some better compression, I doubt that it has become also faster. :unsure:

jaclaz

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These exotic programs might compress better, but I would say they are only good if you need to compress something as much as possible for your own needs. Good luck using them outside of that. WinRAR is very popular, and yet vast majority of people would still be clueless how to open such files :D

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These exotic programs might compress better, but I would say they are only good if you need to compress something as much as possible for your own needs. Good luck using them outside of that. WinRAR is very popular, and yet vast majority of people would still be clueless how to open such files :D

Sure, if you want to "share" a compressed file with the "rest of the world", the most popular format is still ZIP, which is much less tight.

Second comes 7-zip, who got a lot of popularity being Free and Open Source and cross-OS, as it is available - in command line form - for *nixes and it is compatible (can decompress) WinRar files (up to the previous version, but probably will be updated soon to take care of the newish release too).

WinRAR has the limits of being Commercial (but a Free command line UNrar exists for almost any OS on Earth):

http://www.rarlab.com/rar_add.htm

The not-so-trifling difference is that a number of organizations/people that do respect intellectual property and Commercial licensing schemes won't use WinRAR, because you have to get a license for it (the fact that most people consider the use of the trial after it's expiration as just a "nag" is another thing).

As said, besides Unrar, you can use 7-zip to decompress a .rar file, but if you want to make one you need the "full" Winrar or rar.exe (licensed).

It seems to me like the "more relevant" News about the new format is not the tighter compression, but rather some other of the nice new features, like preserving hard links, added solidity about the file structure and password protection.

-X-, can you try checking what happens when you open a WinRar 5.x file with a previous version?

Which error/message/warning does it come out with?

jaclaz

Edited by jaclaz
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

jaclaz, just saw the last line of your post. Maybe you added it in your edit.
Don't have a copy of pre-WinRAR 5 laying around to try.

Anyways, I came back to this thread because I discovered something interesting that I'm sure is old news to some of you.

I was doing my daily backups and my 2 x 1 TB drives are to the brim. My one dump partition is like 900 GB and have about 1/2 to 1 GB free. So I've been running into copy issues lately when working with big files like my VM drives. I decided to make some space by re-compressing a gazillion ZIP and RAR archives to RAR 5 format and packing all my never used folders and files to same.

During my backup / drive contents comparison, I discovered that some files I had re-compressed where actually larger.

Turns out UPX compressed files are best compress with plain ZIP. Nothing in my arsenal beats ZIP.

Check it out...

UPX.png

Notice also that RAR 5 does worse than regular RAR.

Edited by -X-
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

RAR5 compression is great and I regret that it's not that popular (yet). So far not that many users actually know about RAR5 let alone its benefits. And, unfortunately, there are so little tools that can actually unpack RAR5 files - WinRar itself and B1 Free Archiver (at least that's what I've found).

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I never hardly distribute files to anyone so I have no issues using the RAR 5 format. I just pack things for storage.

EDIT: Well that's not entirely true. I do serve up my UDC script on my site xdot.tk and sometimes send people to my dropbox for some other thing.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really like WinRAR, but truth be told, even with the new format, it's still nothing awesome (but then again, it's not a problem for me). I use it solely because of the interface. If you absolutely need better compression, 7-Zip is the winner hands down.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Definitely not hands down. I was packing some setup files I have on my D drive before I backed up two days ago.

7-Zip did better with the Flash installers and WinRAR did better with the Java installer.

Win_RAR5.png

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...bearing in mind the Uncompressed Source may (will in any Installer Source) have some form of compression that, to further compress, could require a different Compression Program to get better, as demonstrated in the last post. You could randomly insert n-Characters into a TXT file then do the same number of n-Characters into another TXT file, compress the two with the exact same Compressor and get different sizes. IOW, "it all depends on the source". ;)

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep, the source is the key. 7-Zip beats WinRAR 5 by not that big a margin but it's definetly no where near being always the case.

Just look at my previous post with UPX packed files. ZIP beat them all!

There were some ZIP settings I didn't try so I might have been able to shave a few bytes but don't know.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I really care about is recovery options. i have a load of damage Winrar files.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

??? Damaged is damaged, no other way around it.

And that has nothing to do with the compression. :no:

Thanks for playing, though. :yes:

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am glad that the developers chose to present the new packer as a distinct "RAR5" format, and allow for creation of RAR3 archives within the same program. I will replace my installations of version 3 soon. When RAR3 appeared, the upgrade went silently, and I had to keep 2 copies around.

The "ZIP" format of today is a version hell. Several different standard compression methods, WavPack for sound, different ways to store Unicode names, different encryption. Whoever is in charge over ZIP seems desperate to cash in on the brand.

I am still a user of RAR2, because I like its Self-Extractor. The new self extractors don't run under Win9x, which is important to me, and they include a freaking Internet Explorer control to display the archive comment with formatting. This causes SFX's to open slower than they could, and I am alarmed seeing Internet Explorer anywhere. It's unnecessary for the formatting that an archive comment includes. I wish Rar-Lab remade their SFX with the old GUI.

For applications like archiving on DVD or sending files over the Internet, ratio isn't as important as file grouping with any ratio, to overcome seek times and latency. For that application stadard ZIP often works well enough.

If I need to archive large number of small files or to store special characters (which should ideally be kept out of filenames), I use 7-Zip, which has quick indexing and Unicode in the Standard.

I find the following three changes in WinRAR to be the most important:

Version 5.01

1. RAR 5.0 archives can include an optional quick open information

controlled with -qo[-|+] switch or "Quick open information" options

group in archiving dialog. It allows to open the archive contents

in WinRAR faster.

RAR archives store every file header containing information such as file name, time, size and attributes immediately before data of described file. This approach is more damage resistant than storing all file headers in a single continuous block, which if broken or truncated would destroy the entire archive contents. But while being more reliable, such file headers scattered around the entire archive are slower to access if we need to quickly open the archive contents in a shell like WinRAR graphical interface.

Version 5.0

a') maximum compression dictionary size is increased up to 1 GB

b') file names and archive comments use UTF-8 encoding.

Incidentally, all of these features are implemented in 7-Zip already. WinRAR, on the other hand, for several years, converted and stored file names and comments in OEM/DOS encoding, which led to it being impossible to reliably use any special punctuation or national symbols at all. It was even worse than working with normal ansi windows-125x encodings.

The quick open index block is stored at the end of the archive. By default RAR 5.01 adds the index only for larger files, presumably because small files are easy to seek over anyway. Unlike 7-Zip, the index block isn't compressed, presumably to protect it from damage.

Opening RAR2 and RAR3 archives with large number of files used to be terribly slow, which is why I opted to attach a SFX to all of the large ones. The SFX can start immediately and read files as it seeks over them without building a list beforehand.

I performed a small Test this weekend. I originally set out to prove the efficiency of multimedia compression, which has been removed. But I failed to do so. The sound and image compression wasn't very efficient to begin with (compared to FLAC and PNG), it hurt solid compression of identical parts of multimedia files, and dictionary based compression in the latest WinRAR has achieved better efficiency if a larger dictionary is used. Multimedia compression did result in shorter compression times on single core (accurate results not recorded), but decompression time increased.

I used games which include uncompressed audio and textures. Decompression speed was tested on a relatievely slow "Yonah" single core CPU. Archives were tested in their native application twice, and the shorter time (second) was recorded. Archive Listing was performed through a SMB share over Fast Ethernet. The host computer was rebooted before the test. CD/DVD would be much slower still.

PPMD increased both compression and decompression time considerably, and didn't yield an increase in ratio on mixed data. I never use Text Compression. Here I tested it on the 'unreal' sample.

Increased compression Dictionary is when a change in ratio is observed, in cases where similar files cannot fit within a smaller Dictionary. This all is new content. I can see an application for RAR5 when compressing Drivers. For example, let's say we have (unpacked) Drivers for different OS versions and CPUs. They have some identical, and some similar files in them. If the similar files fit in the Dictionary, they can be stored for free. I failed to find really large drivers in my collection, because I don't deal with new stuff. But files are getting larger and larger. You can see an improvement in compression of ATI Catalyst.

Results as a screenshot

                PACKER  OPTIONS                 DICT            COMPRESSED                                                                  LENGTHAtheros WLAN Driver 10.0.0.255 / WinXP WinSeven WinEight -- 22,250,273 bytes -- 18 filesatheros         lzma    max                     4mb             4,252,944atheros         lzma    max     ns              4mb             4,590,295atheros         lzma    max                     8mb             4,096,904atheros         lzma    max                     16mb            3,982,217atheros         rar3x   maxall                  4mb             4,740,675atheros         rar3x   notext                  4mb             4,771,745atheros         rar3x   notext  nodelta         4mb             4,816,685atheros         rar3x   notext  noexe           4mb             5,070,474atheros         rar4x   maxall                  4mb             4,752,707atheros         rar5x   maxall                  4mb             4,788,097atheros         rar5x   maxall                  8mb             4,627,789atheros         rar5x   maxall                  16mb            4,526,290ATI Catalyst 9.12 / WinXP WinSeven -- 69,496,709 bytes -- 65 filesaticatalyst912xpseven   lzma    max             4mb             17,254,712aticatalyst912xpseven   lzma    max             8mb             15,947,371aticatalyst912xpseven   lzma    max             16mb            14,032,279aticatalyst912xpseven   lzma    max             32mb            13,515,576aticatalyst912xpseven   lzma    max             64mb            13,363,658aticatalyst912xpseven   rar3x   notext          4mb             19,277,822aticatalyst912xpseven   rar5x   maxall          4mb             19,041,884aticatalyst912xpseven   rar5x   maxall          8mb             17,702,180aticatalyst912xpseven   rar5x   maxall          16mb            15,508,766aticatalyst912xpseven   rar5x   maxall          32mb            14,934,948aticatalyst912xpseven   rar5x   maxall          64mb            14,779,674                PACKER  OPTIONS         DICT    DECMPR  LISTING   COMPRESSED                                                 TIME     TIME      LENGTHHalf-Life 2: Episode One -- 3,896,993,070 bytes -- 37,908 fileshl2ep1          lzma2   max             32mb    236s       1s    1,684,890,163hl2ep1          lzma    max             4mb     245s       1s    1,723,419,343hl2ep1          lzma    max             32mb    240s       1s    1,685,022,015hl2ep1          lzma    max             64mb    240s       1s    1,681,614,846hl2ep1          rar2x   ss              1mb     88s       51s    2,011,542,075hl2ep1          rar2x   ss      mm      1mb     149s      56s    1,769,765,498hl2ep1          rar3x   maxall  notext  4mb     96s       52s    1,716,586,386hl2ep1          rar5x   maxall          4mb     92s       11s    1,749,727,822hl2ep1          rar5x   maxall  qopen   32mb    96s        1s    1,725,203,855hl2ep1          rar5x   maxall  qopen   64mb    98s        1s    1,718,582,822Settlers 5: Heritage of Kings w/ Expansion Disks -- 2,005,230,335 bytes -- 135 filessiedler5        lzma2   max             32mb    156s            1,209,635,997siedler5        lzma    max             32mb    162s            1,209,902,318siedler5        rar3x   notext          4mb     50s             1,317,324,564siedler5        rar5x   maxall          4mb     51s             1,312,645,150siedler5        rar5x   maxall          32mb    48s             1,246,831,706siedler5        rar5x   maxall          64mb    47s             1,206,098,638                PACKER  OPTIONS                         DICT    DECMPR  LISTING  COMPRESSED                                                                 TIME    TIME      LENGTHSingles: Triple Trouble -- 801,187,235 bytes -- 8681 filessingles2        lzma2   max                             64mb    41s      1s     328,751,417singles2        lzma    max                             4mb     46s      1s     340,098,439singles2        lzma    max                             16mb    45s      1s     334,293,232singles2        lzma    max                             32mb    45s      1s     333,224,408singles2        lzma    max                             64mb    45s      1s     328,785,576singles2        rar2x   best                            1mb     15s      8s     391,705,776singles2        rar2x   best    mm                      1mb     17s      8s     403,288,187singles2        rar3x   best    notext                  4mb     15s             374,386,225singles2        rar3x   best    notext-nomm             4mb     14s             374,341,529singles2        rar3x   best    notext-nomm-nodelta     4mb     14s      7s     369,773,626singles2        rar5x   maxall                          4mb     15s      3s     373,120,045singles2        rar5x   maxall                          16mb    15s      3s     366,637,675singles2        rar5x   maxall                          32mb    16s      3s     365,459,931singles2        rar5x   maxall  qopen                   32mb    16s      1s     365,752,288singles2        rar5x   maxall  qopen                   64mb    20s      1s     361,411,799singles2        rar5x   maxall  qopen                   128mb   20s      1s     351,586,561Unreal, Unreal: Return to Na Pali (Gold) -- 571,297,683 bytes -- 314 filesunreal          lzma    max             16mb    31s             205,169,987unreal          lzma    max             32mb    30s             203,490,639unreal          rar2x   best    ss      1mb      9s             243,741,148unreal          rar2x   best    ss-mm   1mb     16s             231,704,104unreal          rar3x   maxall          4mb     30s             227,054,915unreal          rar3x   notext-nodelta  4mb     11s             227,252,921unreal          rar3x   notext-noexe    4mb     11s             226,806,347unreal          rar5x   maxall          4mb     10s             226,072,070unreal          rar5x   maxall          32mb    10s             219,120,062

GUI is the same. A lot of people hate it's dated look but I don't mind it.

Those people who hate the GUI must be why Microsoft is trying so hard to make functions difficult to find in every major version. I switched to WinRAR from WinZip v7, and found it better organized. Perhaps I would like to see an optional Tree-View showing only the inside of the archive (not aiming to become a file manager). In general the only changes to the GUI that are needed are filling gaps and reorganizing the layout in case of obsolete and removed functionality.

No Ribbons, please!

Overall, I am pleaed with the great job on the current Version 5!!

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But be aware that smallest compressed size is not always the best. For example, according to this particular example of a mix of files, decompressing the files using PAQ8px took over SIX HOURS, while it took 7-Zip less than 8 seconds. (I was quite amazed)

Cheers and Regards

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But be aware that smallest compressed size is not always the best. For example, according to this particular example of a mix of files, decompressing the files using PAQ8px took over SIX HOURS, while it took 7-Zip less than 8 seconds. (I was quite amazed)

Cheers and Regards

I know. I'm curently testing PAQ8 vs nanozip for file size, and unzipping. I need a small compression for I have a 1500 mb size limit for my site.

EDIT: after looking at the size difference between Nano and PAQ8. I decided to go with nano due to little differences in size and a much faster decompression.

nano compare.bmp

Edited by Flasche
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.