RAR vs ZIP
-
Suddenly every second submission I'm seeing is packed full of RAR nastiness. Has someone, somewhere decided that WinRAR is way, way cooler than Winzip and I didn't get the memo? Or is there a university somewhere preaching zip bad, rar good? It's just weird.
cheers, Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
RAR has better compression than ZIP and better spanning support, so it only makes sense that it's used more. However it seems to be a bit slower on the extraction side. I know nothing of 7Z, but if its compression is better then I'm all for it. Another note is that WinZip can't extract some RAR archives, not even in v11.
-
Rar has always been way way cooler than zip. Better compression, solid archives, better spanning, zip just isn't in the same league. I never ever understood why zip files beat out both Rar and Arj archives. Winzip was the massive nail in the coffin for me. Horrid user interface, block whenever you click on a window to move it. Blechy! Rar Rar, Hes our man! If he can't do it, No one ... will. - Phil
Completely agreed. We developers internally only use WinRAR, since it provides a way better compression at the same speed as WinZip. Only if we send stuff out, we let WinRAR create zip-files, since the average XP-user usually doesn't have clue what to do with a rar. Greetz Torsten
-
Suddenly every second submission I'm seeing is packed full of RAR nastiness. Has someone, somewhere decided that WinRAR is way, way cooler than Winzip and I didn't get the memo? Or is there a university somewhere preaching zip bad, rar good? It's just weird.
cheers, Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
The answer is clearly http://www.7-zip.org/ Better compression than both WinRar or WinZip, GPL, nice integration into explorer shell, no popups, good GUI, and Microsoft exchange server is too dumb to block .7z attachments. :cool:
-
Vikram A Punathambekar wrote:
I hate the WinRar interface.
I liked it until it started asking me for money all the time... Then I got 7Zip. Now that I'm using linux most of the time, I just use the commandline versions (rar -x... etc) or Ark/File Roller or something.
Vikram A Punathambekar wrote:
Besides, Rar is not as ubiquitous as Zip.
Well, at one time black and white TVs were more ubiquitous than colour TVs. Aren't you glad that didn't stop colour TV?
destynova wrote:
Well, at one time black and white TVs were more ubiquitous than colour TVs. Aren't you glad that didn't stop colour TV?
That is ridiculous. Having a color TV when most of your neighbors have B&W TVs doesn't mean you can't watch their TV once in a while or the other way round. On the other hand, if somebody sends a RAR file, the receiver *has* to have WinRAR#; which is not the case with Zip files. # Or a compatible program, of course. On a lighter note, I don't watch TV. :-D
Cheers, Vikram.
"...we are disempowered to cultivate in their communities an inclination to assimilate to our culture." - Stan Shannon.
-
Suddenly every second submission I'm seeing is packed full of RAR nastiness. Has someone, somewhere decided that WinRAR is way, way cooler than Winzip and I didn't get the memo? Or is there a university somewhere preaching zip bad, rar good? It's just weird.
cheers, Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
Hi chris Just for interest sake. If my memory serves me correct, RAR has better compression than ZIP. That aside, I dont use RAR or ZIP. I use WinAce (ACE compression). The app can handle almost anything (RAR, ZIP, PKZip, etc) and i find the interface a lot friendlier and attractive. (although ACE compression isnt as good as RAR). If you haven't tried it, give it a shot...i guarantee you'll be hooked. I am at least
-
How many times have you hit extract twice? its just rubbish
I have to agree with the other "never" response. I have unziped thousands of files using the built in zip and never once had to do it a second time. It is about as idiot proof as it gets. Granted there are features missing if you want to pack something up for distribution but that is not what it was meant for.
-
I use a free program called IZarc. It does everything, for free. "If you break a crumb in half, you have two crumbs." - George Carlin
I agree. I use IZArc and am completely satisfied with it's operation and interface.
-
The answer is clearly http://www.7-zip.org/ Better compression than both WinRar or WinZip, GPL, nice integration into explorer shell, no popups, good GUI, and Microsoft exchange server is too dumb to block .7z attachments. :cool:
Can anyone give a comparison of the advantages between IZArc and 7-Zip?
-
Many software supports RAR and ZIP. UltimateZip supports both Zip and Rar. I have a brief writeup over here on UltimateZip: http://lavanyadeepak.blogspot.com/2007/01/ultimatezip-ultimate-desktop-utility.html[^]
Vasudevan Deepak Kumar Personal Homepage Tech Gossips
Winrar support both zip and rar, as well as many other archive type. The shell extension is great and really easy to use. I stopped using zip files when I was unable to unzip after a backup on a cd on which I verified the data written. It's just not rar. And for the one who said that winrar ask for money, they don't use winzip because it do it too!
Jean-Michel Aubin Software Engineer Imaging division Matrox Electronics Ltee.
-
Suddenly every second submission I'm seeing is packed full of RAR nastiness. Has someone, somewhere decided that WinRAR is way, way cooler than Winzip and I didn't get the memo? Or is there a university somewhere preaching zip bad, rar good? It's just weird.
cheers, Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
-
The fact are, Winrar is better than Winzip. - Archive are smaller - Compress faster (at equal compression ratio)
Jcmorin wrote:
The fact are, Winrar is better than Winzip.
Only as long as your files never need accessed by the unwashed masses, at which point zip is infinitely better because the rar is unopenable.
-- Rules of thumb should not be taken for the whole hand.
-
Winrar support both zip and rar, as well as many other archive type. The shell extension is great and really easy to use. I stopped using zip files when I was unable to unzip after a backup on a cd on which I verified the data written. It's just not rar. And for the one who said that winrar ask for money, they don't use winzip because it do it too!
Jean-Michel Aubin Software Engineer Imaging division Matrox Electronics Ltee.
I do accept. But WinRar is not free and hence I switched to UltimateZip which supports and is free. :)
Vasudevan Deepak Kumar Personal Homepage Tech Gossips
-
I have to agree with the other "never" response. I have unziped thousands of files using the built in zip and never once had to do it a second time. It is about as idiot proof as it gets. Granted there are features missing if you want to pack something up for distribution but that is not what it was meant for.
Maybe I come under fool, or idiot, however, it would seem they have fixed it now, I've just tried it again on a large file. In the past it would leave the ‘Next’ button enabled while it was unzipping, leaving the (very impatient) me to click it again (thinking it hadn’t understood my ever so simple request). Anyway, I use Izarc now http://www.izarc.org/ , and it does RAR and ZIP and its free. So, does anybody else use IZarc? At one point I heard it had spyware in it, but it all seems fine.
-
I hate the WinRar interface. X| Besides, Rar is not as ubiquitous as Zip.
Cheers, Vikram.
"...we are disempowered to cultivate in their communities an inclination to assimilate to our culture." - Stan Shannon.
You kiddin'? When it comes to UI, WinZip is an absolute dog of an application. If I didn't have WinRAR or 7ZFM on my system, I'd do all my zipping and unzipping at the command prompt (seriously, I have and I would again). As for the ubiquity of RAR, WinZip even supports opening RAR files now, and 7ZFM has for as long as I've had it.
Christopher S. 'coldacid' Charabaruk E-mail: chris at coldacid dot ent Web: http://coldacid.net/
-
I have to agree with the other "never" response. I have unziped thousands of files using the built in zip and never once had to do it a second time. It is about as idiot proof as it gets. Granted there are features missing if you want to pack something up for distribution but that is not what it was meant for.
-
Suddenly every second submission I'm seeing is packed full of RAR nastiness. Has someone, somewhere decided that WinRAR is way, way cooler than Winzip and I didn't get the memo? Or is there a university somewhere preaching zip bad, rar good? It's just weird.
cheers, Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
The Imploder on the Amiga is the still unbeaten champion of compression applications... it even had its own music, which still sounds amazing today! :cool: Other than that I now use 7-Zip.
-
Maybe I come under fool, or idiot, however, it would seem they have fixed it now, I've just tried it again on a large file. In the past it would leave the ‘Next’ button enabled while it was unzipping, leaving the (very impatient) me to click it again (thinking it hadn’t understood my ever so simple request). Anyway, I use Izarc now http://www.izarc.org/ , and it does RAR and ZIP and its free. So, does anybody else use IZarc? At one point I heard it had spyware in it, but it all seems fine.
I've been using IZarc for a couple of years now, though I only use it when WinZip can't accomplish whatever I need. If .7z and .rar files really do take over, though, I can see I'm going to be using it much more. I also noticed just lately that IZarc's UI actually shows folders, where my old WinZip 9 doesn't. I'll bet I'm far from the only one who has ignored all the WinZip upgrade notices, since IZarc is free and there's nothing in WinZip 10+ that I'm willing to pay money for. -- modified at 1:21 Friday 2nd February, 2007 (Grr... staying up too late trying to get my laptop's wireless to work in Edgy results in annoying little typos. :doh:)
-
Suddenly every second submission I'm seeing is packed full of RAR nastiness. Has someone, somewhere decided that WinRAR is way, way cooler than Winzip and I didn't get the memo? Or is there a university somewhere preaching zip bad, rar good? It's just weird.
cheers, Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
Chris did not get the memo becuase there wasn't one. Someone just submited RAR archive, which - to my surprise and despite to myriad of applications handling all major formats - caused Chris a headache. I don't use WinZip. The market is so saturated with free (de)compressing tools, that nobody should be *buying* one.
-
In all my recent XP installs, I've stopped installing WinZip, since the builtin ZIP-support of XP is enough as I see it. Oh, and I hate RAR.
I'm with you. We have to ship software updates around to all our customers and use the buit-in ZIP support in XP and 2003 Server. It mightn't be the best but the last thing we want is to have to install and support another piece of software and much less, pay for one, at every site. We're talkin' users here, not geeks.
-
Michael Dunn wrote:
I've always found WinRAR to give better compression than WinZip 9
You said it... I had a release to the offshore team members and I compresses the source files and binaries. It was nearly 52 MB or something when I used zip but in RAR which compressed the files 3 - 4MB lesser in size. Actually the size of the file really very costly while transfer data through FTP or some other slow medium.
-Sarath_._ "Great hopes make everything great possible" - Benjamin Franklin
My blog - Sharing My Thoughts, An Article - Understanding Statepattern
Also, if you haven't tried it, try using solid compression on the RAR file. It makes the archive all one stream, instead of individual files, and puts files of same type next to each other to help out the compressor. You can get quite significant savings (an extra 30% sometimes), especially if there are a large number of files.