Isn't "WinRAR And The Infinite 40-Day Trial" the name of a smashing pumpkins album? :v:
How great would it be if all the other softwares had infinite trials.
Once I discovered 7Zip I never looked back.
Though WinRar will always hold a special place in my nostalgia heart.
Funny thing is that I just downloaded WinRAR on the new desktop just hours ago.
[QUOTE=redBadger;51947181]Once I discovered 7Zip I never looked back.
Though WinRar will always hold a special place in my nostalgia heart.[/QUOTE]
You know what they say "You can be a WinRar, but trying to piss with 7zips? You better got a steel bladder."
7zip is freeware and open source, with the reference SDK implementation in multiple programming languages (public domain). It's faster compared to winrar.
Supported formats for 7zip
- 7z
- XZ
- BZIP2
- GZIP
- TAR
- ZIP
- WIM
- AR
- ARJ
- CAB
- CHM
- CPIO
- CramFS
- DMG
- EXT
- FAT
- GPT
- HFS
- IHEX
- ISO
- LZH
- LZMA
- MBR
- MSI
- NSIS
- NTFS
- QCOW2
- RAR
- RPM
- SquashFS
- UDF
- UEFI
- VDI
- VHD
- VMDK
- WIM
- XAR
- Z
Supported formats for winrar
- RAR
- ZIP
- CAB
- ARJ
- LZH
- TAR
- GZ
- BZ2
- ACE
- UUE
- JAR
- ISO
- 7Z
- XZ
- Z
[QUOTE=cartman300;51947219]Supported formats for winrar
- CAB
- ARJ
- LZH
- TAR
- GZ
- BZ2
- ACE
- UUE
- JAR
- ISO
- 7Z
- XZ
- Z[/QUOTE]
Doesn't even support RAR? what a ripoff
[QUOTE=mastermaul;51947226]Doesn't even support RAR? what a ripoff[/QUOTE]
Oh oops :v: It was at the top of the site, didn't even notice
[img]http://carp.tk/$/firefox_2017-03-12_06-26-25.png[/img]
peazip is another really good foss alternative
i preferred it to 7zip when i first tried them to escape winrar because its UI was more familiar
the thing i have with 7zip is i cant start .exe files directly from within the application (it doesn't temp extract everything so that say if a setup and a bunch of files associated needed to run, i'd have ot extract them somewhere whereas winrar just makes a temp directory for as long as it's open then deletes it)
[QUOTE=cartman300;51947219]-triggered-[/QUOTE]
7zip do have superior format support and compression algorithms, but its UI is absolutely atrocious. I use WinRAR to extract things primarily for that reason, since I only need the common archives anyways.
Another thing that's good about the .rar format is the support of built in ECC. WinRAR is able to embed correction symbols directly into the archives, while other formats can only generate an external parity file. This makes .rar formats very good for achiving, if you don't mind settling for a "good enough" compression ratio.
I always kinda hoped that it was a secret that the winrar creators somehow weren't aware of :v:
7zip ownes, winrar bones
i6 like how he talks about nagware and then at the end says the typical dont forget to subscribe bs, which is even worse than nagware because it will never go away
[QUOTE=cartman300;51947219]7zip is freeware and open source, with the reference SDK implementation in multiple programming languages (public domain). It's faster compared to winrar.
Supported formats for 7zip
[/QUOTE]
I just prefer the ui for winrar, though I have both installed.
[QUOTE=B!N4RY;51947361]Another thing that's good about the .rar format is the support of built in ECC. WinRAR is able to embed correction symbols directly into the archives, while other formats can only generate an external parity file. This makes .rar formats very good for achiving, if you don't mind settling for a "good enough" compression ratio.[/QUOTE]
Archive data should have parity at rest, not redundant bits on the application level, so it's unnecessary bloat for 'real' archival.
[QUOTE=glitchvid;51947389]Archive data should have parity at rest, not redundant bits on the application level, so it's unnecessary bloat for 'real' archival.[/QUOTE]
And 'real' archival doesn't use rar.
[QUOTE=glitchvid;51947389]Archive data should have parity at rest, not redundant bits on the application level, so it's unnecessary bloat for 'real' archival.[/QUOTE]
Errors can occur anywhere between the storage to the numerous applications a file go through. It doesn't matter if your uncompressed data have parity in them if you can't even extract them from a corrupted archive.
WinRAR doesn't disclose what type of ECC they use, but it's most likely an erasure code based on Reed-Solomon code that distributes the parity throughout the archive. These type of code are robust enough to let allow contiguous blocks of the archive corrupted, and the code is still able to recover the missing/corrupted block to a fair extend.
The other archive formats that generates external parity files can probably only handle sparse bit flips, not burst errors. Additionally, if you lose that parity file, the actual archive is essentially unprotected.
Me and this guy have the same laptop.
Neat.
[QUOTE=B!N4RY;51947434]Errors can occur anywhere between the storage to the numerous applications a file go through. It doesn't matter if your uncompressed data have parity in them if you can't even extract them from a corrupted archive.
WinRAR doesn't disclose what type of ECC they use, but it's most likely an erasure code based on Reed-Solomon code that distributes the parity throughout the archive. These type of code are robust enough to let allow contiguous blocks of the archive corrupted, and the code is still able to recover the missing/corrupted block to a fair extend.
The other archive formats that generates external parity files can probably only handle sparse bit flips, not burst errors. Additionally, if you lose that parity file, the actual archive is essentially unprotected.[/QUOTE]
The only place WinRAR's ECC functions are useful in the archival sense is if you run into problems at-rest (sitting on physical media), which is something you should prevent using proper redundant filesystems (ZFS, BTRFS); not by using a proprietary and bloated file format.
This is of course assuming you can compress the data without issue (If you can't you have MUCH bigger problems than if it'll survive at-rest), and if you can get the data to its final location (Which again, if you're having problems with the at-rest durability is the least of your concerns).
Data archival should either store the whole file uncompressed, or use XZ/7z, and if really needed use .TAR or .DAR; not proprietary .rar which performs worse than XZ/LZMA and doesn't have the maturity of .tar.
[editline]12th March 2017[/editline]
[QUOTE=helifreak;51947413]And 'real' archival doesn't use rar.[/QUOTE]
literally what I'm saying.
[QUOTE=Crimor;51947387]I just prefer the ui for winrar, though I have both installed.[/QUOTE]
7zip has a UI?
I just use the right-click context menu to extract and archive everything. :v:
[QUOTE=Gmod4ever;51947560]7zip has a UI?
I just use the right-click context menu to extract and archive everything. :v:[/QUOTE]
7zfm.exe on Windows.
[QUOTE=glitchvid;51947527]The only place WinRAR's ECC functions are useful in the archival sense is if you run into problems at-rest (sitting on physical media), which is something you should prevent using proper redundant filesystems (ZFS, BTRFS); not by using a proprietary and bloated file format.
This is of course assuming you can compress the data without issue (If you can't you have MUCH bigger problems than if it'll survive at-rest), and if you can get the data to its final location (Which again, if you're having problems with the at-rest durability is the least of your concerns).
Data archival should either store the whole file uncompressed, or use XZ/7z, and if really needed use .TAR or .DAR; not proprietary .rar which performs worse than XZ/LZMA and doesn't have the maturity of .tar.
[/QUOTE]
If you're wanting to archive large amount of data and want to maximize reliability, then it would be beneficial to use a redundant file system for sure. However, I should've made it clear that this is not the use case I'm describing.
If you only need to archive data for personal uses (eg, putting an archive with a couple of files on a flash drive and passing it around), having an archive with distributed parity provides enough protection as it is for most consumer use cases. Most people would not go out their way and setup redundant file systems for their personal backups.
the digital audio workstation, reaper, has a similar model. when you download it, you have an "evaluation copy" until you buy a license. it states that you must buy a license after 60 days of use, but after the time has passed it doesn't stop you from using it, nor does it disable or restrict any features at any point.
[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/NFCDNfP.png[/IMG]
it's pretty neat and it makes me feel kinda bad about not having actually purchased it yet since they're so chill about it
[QUOTE=B!N4RY;51947608]If you're wanting to archive large amount of data, then it would be beneficial to use a redundant file system for sure. However, I should've made it clear that this is not the scenario I'm describing. [/Quote]
You were the one who said archiving, and if you plan on storing data for any long period of time redundancy isn't just a suggestion, it's a requirement. Look at AWS Glacier or Google's cold line storage, all are at least 3x redundant to prevent bit rot.
[QUOTE=B!N4RY;51947608]
If you only need to archive small amount of data for personal uses (eg, putting an archive on a flash drive and passing it around), having an archive with distributed parity provides enough protection as it is for most consumer use cases. Most people would not go out their way and setup redundant file systems for their personal backups.[/QUOTE]
Distributing/sharing files (esp on flash media) doesn't need parity unless you're running the DoD nuclear codes around, your warez/whatever aren't going to corrupt between the time you write it to the drive and take it to school.
For personal backups most people should use a proper service like Backblaze or another provider if they want their shit to be safe, not rely on a propriety format and hope only one or two bytes corrupt (whereas it's usually whole sectors on HDDs meaning GL getting that data back ecc or not).
You'd be better served buying two HDDs and mirroring them (offline) and use the extra space from using 7z to put more data on there.
I had been using WinRAR up until I sent someone a .rar file and they had no idea what it was.
After that, I was still using WinRAR but had it make .zip files instead.
[QUOTE=redBadger;51947181]Once I discovered 7Zip I never looked back.
Though WinRar will always hold a special place in my nostalgia heart.[/QUOTE]
I only downloaded 7Zip because my version of WinRAR has encountered some files it has been unable to open, because it interprets certain files to be "damaged" and refuses to open them, no matter what I try. And I honestly can't be arsed to download a more recent version, either.
[QUOTE=sirdownloadsalot;51946765]Isn't "WinRAR And The Infinite 40-Day Trial" the name of a smashing pumpkins album? :v:[/QUOTE]
[I]The world is a zip file...[/I]
This is actually a common theme with Russian software. Some popular file managers and other various software will have either a "free for ex-USSR" model or "there's a key that opens up functionality, but there's a tiny restriction".
For example, PVS-Studio profiler lets you use serial number "FREE-FREE-FREE-FREE" to use it indefinitely on your projects, but wants you to add an extra comment to each of your source files.
Same thing goes for software such as Adobe and AutoDesk if I'm not misstaken.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.