VOGONS

Common searches


Why 7Z not RAR or ZIP?

Topic actions

Reply 21 of 27, by lordmogul

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie

And don't forget that 7zip (the application, not the format) is better ad making zip archives than winzp and better at making rar archives than winrar.

In the end it doesn't really matter anymore. Most programs nowadays can open more than one type or archives, and zip, rar and 7z are most used anyway (with addition to tar, and gzip on Linux)
When preparing something for a pure DOS environment, it has to be unpacked anyway. That can always happen before bringing it to DOS. No matter if will be transported via network, floppy, usb, etc.

P3 933EB @1035 (7x148) | CUSL2-C | GF3Ti200 | 256M PC133cl3 @148cl3 | 98SE & XP Pro SP3
X5460 @4.1 (9x456) | P35-DS3R | GTX660Ti | 8G DDR2-800cl5 @912cl6 | XP Pro SP3 & 7 SP1
3570K @4.4 GHz | Z77-D3H | GTX1060 | 16G DDR3-1600cl9 @2133cl12 | 7 SP1

Reply 22 of 27, by CasualRobert

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie

I usually use 7Zip on newer and older systems, because Winrar and WinZip do have those "Your Time expired buy Winrar now!" warnings, so i kind of use 7zip everytime even on older systems, because i became attached to it.

😀

Reply 23 of 27, by kolano

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
Osprey wrote:

I have fond memories of PAR from the Usenet days. I don't remember if it applied its own compression algorithm, but it was an archive format that was great for recovery. I miss being able to reconstruct missing volumes that I couldn't download.

PAR files are unrelated to compression. Parity (i.e PAR) files are used to replace missing sections of data. This applied well to usenet where frequently subsets of messages may go missing.

I keep hoping to see a return of the concept of PAR files for torrents. I imagine that distributing a few parity files amongst a swarm of downloaders would cost almost nothing in the amount of download data, but would greatly reduce the chances of torrents breaking when a seeder went away.

Eyecandy: Turn your computer into an expensive lava lamp.

Reply 24 of 27, by DosDaddy

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie

Quite frankly only very occasionally have I found myself in situations where I needed to get a Win9x/DOS environment working from scratch without the aid of a period software archive, and that's where plain .zip's proved a better choice, but any use of .zip beyond that I don't think I could justify in 2018.

7zip's hands down the best "usable" compression in town, but as a long time .rar Usenet dweller, I think I continue to unconsciously perpetuate the notion that this format may be more resistant to hijacking and integrity failures, which thing may or may not be true today, but it certainly was back then, so a thousand pieced .rar's each split into a thousand yenc's....

Reply 26 of 27, by DosDaddy

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie

When it comes to compressing files for my own personal use, I always go with the latest and greatest WinRAR (I'd say it's a tradition at this point), but if I'm to share something online, there's a good chance someone will not be able to open it, so I go .7z. RAR5 has a few notable advantages over RAR4 and there's no reason for me to take that step backwards, so I guess it all depends on what you're using it for.