Hard Light Productions Forums
Off-Topic Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: nubbles526 on January 28, 2008, 09:31:50 am
-
Why is it that so many members of the FS community prefers to pack files in 7zip format rather than WinRar or Winzip :confused:
-
better compression algorithm
it doesn't make up for the fact that .7z has a sucky install base
normal old .zip has a much better install base
-
Zip is best for widespread use. Pretty much everyone has something that can open it. 7Zip has better compression so if you're going for a limited distribution (i.e a forum post) it's the best choice.
Given that it's proprietary and requires a download/installation I can't see any good reason to use rar unless you have to cut a large archive into chunks (and that's on the assumption that 7Zip can't do this. I haven't actually checked).
@Kazan - WinRar had a sucky install base 4-5 years ago too. I used to see posts all the time asking how to extract .rar files.
-
7Zip can cut archives. I'd say get 7Zip. It can read most archives, including the ones you listed, and can zip using .ZIP and .7Z. It has better compression when using .ZIP than other other .ZIP utilities and .7Z is superior.
-
Yah, 7-Zip is an easy choice. Opens up a lot of archive types (including rar), can compress to Zip and 7z, among other options, and can split archives so that the files end up being ---.zip.001 or ---.7z.001and so forth. Free. Doesn't try to automatically claim all archive types for itself, unlike Winzip and WinRar.
-
I think 7z is less user friendly. And when you say better compression you meant by that it makes the files even smaller than rar or zip?
-
Yah, 7-Zip is an easy choice. Opens up a lot of archive types (including rar), can compress to Zip and 7z, among other options, and can split archives so that the files end up being ---.zip.001 or ---.7z.001and so forth. Free. Doesn't try to automatically claim all archive types for itself, unlike Winzip and WinRar.
It's a good program, but the fact is that it's much less common than the other two. The last thing someone wants to do when they download a file is grope around the internet for the right program to open it. It is better to make self-extracting archives with it instead (at least for large files where the self-extractor won't make them much bigger).
-
I think 7z is less user friendly. And when you say better compression you meant by that it makes the files even smaller than rar or zip?
I think 7-Zip is user-friendly enough. A simple user interface, all the needed options behind right-click on files, fast performance, no constant nagging about registration. And yes, the compression ratio of 7z is better than that of zip or rar.
It's a good program, but the fact is that it's much less common than the other two. The last thing someone wants to do when they download a file is grope around the internet for the right program to open it. It is better to make self-extracting archives with it instead (at least for large files where the self-extractor won't make them much bigger).
Good point. I try to advertise 7-Zip on several occasions, but it still is quite uncommon and many people are sceptic about new programs. "We don' need 'em Seven-zips, we've got a Win'em Zip right here" seems to be a common case. And why not? With all the information security hustle going on, it's not wise to just start installing programs whenever someone suggests them.
-
The worst thing (and I don't know why people do this in the first place) is when someone zips up an .exe file.
I mean, what the Hell, man! You aren't making the file that much smaller, and now I have to wait for that $%#$ing 1.5gb file to extract! :mad:
Look at it this way, five less minutes of download time vs. 20 minutes of extraction (depending).
Grrrrrrr. :mad2:
-
1. if you've got a 1.5GB exe file you're doing something wrong.
2. Download size is important to the server as is the space uncompressed files take up.
It's a good program, but the fact is that it's much less common than the other two. The last thing someone wants to do when they download a file is grope around the internet for the right program to open it. It is better to make self-extracting archives with it instead (at least for large files where the self-extractor won't make them much bigger).
That argument only really applies to 7zip vs zip. The only reason anyone has an extractor for rar is precisely because they groped around looking for a program to extract rars so it's a false comparison to compare how widespread the two are.
Rar became a favourite because it had a better compression ratio than zip. If something comes along that is better than it is and can also extract rar files there is no real good reason to make new archives in that format or download the program on new PCs/reinstalls.
-
That argument only really applies to 7zip vs zip. The only reason anyone has an extractor for rar is precisely because they groped around looking for a program to extract rars so it's a false comparison to compare how widespread the two are.
Rar became a favourite because it had a better compression ratio than zip. If something comes along that is better than it is and can also extract rar files there is no real good reason to make new archives in that format or download the program on new PCs/reinstalls.
Yeah, I was mainly referring to zips, although your comments also applied to those at one point. Still, I think at the present moment, a lot more people have Winrar already installed (for whatever reason) than 7zip. The popularity of these things is self-perpetuating in a sense.
What is the compression/extraction speed like with 7z and 7zip? One thing I don't like about rar is that its extraction speed is quite slow with big files. I often use zips instead of it for this reason, even if the rar archive is a little smaller (usually not by a whole lot in my experience).
-
i like 7zip but i use rar or zip instead.
i typically just use zip because its more common and everyone knows how to work with them. i have received flak for using self-extractors before. people who are afraid of viruses or spyware. so i tend to release in zip. i backup and archive old versions of things in 7zip and rar.
-
The worst thing (and I don't know why people do this in the first place) is when someone zips up an .exe file.
One more reason to not use self extractors -- people won't try and zip them again (at least most of them won't) :p
Also, self extracting thingies are always a bit annoying for those of us not using Windows.
-
i like 7zip but i use rar or zip instead.
i typically just use zip because its more common and everyone knows how to work with them. i have received flak for using self-extractors before. people who are afraid of viruses or spyware. so i tend to release in zip. i backup and archive old versions of things in 7zip and rar.
Indeed. I only heard of 7zip when I first made my first step into HLP.
The only annoying thing about 7zips are that you have to get the original program to open. I am a traveler, and I tend to use other people's computer quite often. And then you always have to ask them if you could download them, and if they say no, you will have to do tons explaining to do etc. etc.
7zip does too less advertising.
-
Yeah, I was mainly referring to zips, although your comments also applied to those at one point.
True but zip is natively supported by Windows now. So pretty much everyone can unzip. Rar and 7Zip are not supported by Windows natively which means when you install the OS the first thing you have to do is go out and download winRar. So it's not really any different in terms of how annoying it is than 7Zip, it's simply that more people have already been annoyed by having to get winRar. :D
-
I use the .7z program because it can open way more compression types than winrar. Plus it's free. I haven't used winrar in a very long time, actually.
Usually when I have to compress something, I always do it in .zip anyway, because I know .7z pisses people off. On the other hand, if I'm doing it for my own sake, ie to save HD space while keeping something, I'll use 7z.
-
Unless I remember incorrectly, the .7z program can handle .rar files anyway, so you only need one program once you've got it. Yes, the trouble is getting people to install .7z, but honestly, is this group catering to the masses? We're a mod community for a game that was released last millennium. Anyone who cares enough to be interested in what this community is producing can surely be prodded that extra little step to upgrading to some decent [cough]free![/cough] compression software, right?
-
ZIP for widely distributed files since almost anything will open a ZIP file these days. 7ZIP seems to be the best overall but limited distribution. I'm of the opinion that you should cater to the larger group and use ZIP but if there is a need for 7 then use it.
-
I've always found that any actual difference in compression is totally arbitrary for the majority of the stuff that I use them for. I don't really support using 7-zip or rar for anything; they're poorly supported compared to zip.
I don't really recommend using compressed files for a backup, at least not any more, if you can afford it. It's great for storage, but if you ever have to do any data recovery, you could get pretty screwed.
The only situation where I see it being acceptable is if you're intentionally trying to limit your audience (eg Linux source distribution packages) or if you have no other choice (using Linux and can't get the zip utility to work properly).
-
Heh... the latest WinRAR can do .7z files... WinZip shouldn't be too far behind. Then we'll be set. The masses can use the lovely nagware like they want to anyways. XD
-
I don't really recommend using compressed files for a backup, at least not any more, if you can afford it. It's great for storage, but if you ever have to do any data recovery, you could get pretty screwed.
Backup programs are also quite screwy though. And actually GETTING the files to be compressed takes FOREVER.
Heres a fact for you:
I have compressed a 300mb .exe file to all three formats. Guess which one processes it the fastest?
WinRAR.
-
How much slower was 7Zip, which format did you use, and which one had better compression?
-
It's a tricky question, and depends muchly on what your idea of 'best' is.
Zip is very fast and widespread - It's the closest thing we have to a universal archive format.
Rar is slower but offers much better compression, and also supports ECC which means unlike zip and 7z it can compensate for some amount of archive corruption.
7zip is potentially the best compressor of the three, but also the potentially slowest and most memory hungry. It also has a mind-bogglingly large number of tweakable params. The Linux version has no GUI and is a real PITA to use; The GUI for the Windows version is okay but explains almost nothing about the options. It's very much still a 'l33t' user archiver, as RAR and ACE used to be. One big point about 7z is that it's an open format, so unlike rar it could be ported to any platform.
My current favorite archive is rar - It's easier to archive stuff with in both Linux and Windows, and the ECC blocks add that extra piece of mind; It's already saved me once due to a CD deteriorating on me (4 f'ing years! That's how long the dark blue/purple dye CDRs last! The light green ones are waaay better...).
I'd like 7z to rise up, but they need to make it Useable by normal people. Hell, some easily accessible documentation and a decent GUI for the Linux version would be a start!
Both winrar and 7zip for windows support each other's archive format.
In Linux they don't.
-
7zip is potentially the best compressor of the three, but also the potentially slowest and most memory hungry.
That doesn't sound good. I already find rar too slow on unpacking large files, and the improvement in size over zip is usually not that great. :p
-
1. if you've got a 1.5GB exe file you're doing something wrong.
2. Download size is important to the server as is the space uncompressed files take up.
The EXE isntaller would already be compressed so there's no point. Further compression of an installer full of compressed data would yield negligible savings.
-
My current favorite archive is rar - It's easier to archive stuff with in both Linux and Windows, and the ECC blocks add that extra piece of mind; It's already saved me once due to a CD deteriorating on me (4 f'ing years! That's how long the dark blue/purple dye CDRs last! The light green ones are waaay better...).
I'd like 7z to rise up, but they need to make it Useable by normal people. Hell, some easily accessible documentation and a decent GUI for the Linux version would be a start!
(http://img201.imageshack.us/img201/5339/screenshotqp1.th.png) (http://img201.imageshack.us/my.php?image=screenshotqp1.png)
Decent enough?
Peazip (http://peazip.sourceforge.net/) would be nice too, but it's just too buggy ATM
Both winrar and 7zip for windows support each other's archive format.
In Linux they don't.
They don't have to (the full p7zip package does, however, support a lot of formats, including rar), since a gui frontend (like gnome file-roller) will hide the backends and present a unified interface for all archive formats.
-
I don't really recommend using compressed files for a backup, at least not any more, if you can afford it. It's great for storage, but if you ever have to do any data recovery, you could get pretty screwed.
Backup programs are also quite screwy though. And actually GETTING the files to be compressed takes FOREVER.
Heres a fact for you:
I have compressed a 300mb .exe file to all three formats. Guess which one processes it the fastest?
WinRAR.
I just said you shouldn't compress the files. :p You can always back things up using tar, which leaves the files uncompressed, but puts them into one file and can be written to and read to by a number of programs (including 7zip).
I'm not sure what you're doing with a 300mb exe file; I've never heard of an application that big. It sounds like you're trying to compress a self-extractor. :p What program is it, anyway?
-
The TBP installer is 1 Gb. Or was.
-
Who exactly compresses self-extractors?
-
The TBP installer is 1 Gb. Or was.
It's still a self-extractor. :p
-
If you wanna do it right, I'd say just use the self-extractor, then 7z the installation directory... as long as there is a way to put the necessary additions to the registry etc in afterwards.
And, if you want the compression options in 7zip explained, try clicking the help button... works wonders. XD (You have to scroll down to the options list IIRC.)
-
I'm not sure what you're doing with a 300mb exe file; I've never heard of an application that big. It sounds like you're trying to compress a self-extractor. :p What program is it, anyway?
An Inferno one.
@Nx: Peazip? Sounds small...
EDIT: @Nx: That BtRL background on your linux is hot
-
Is that Ubuntu or
Kubuntu Edubuntu?
*EDITED*
-
I'm not sure what you're doing with a 300mb exe file; I've never heard of an application that big. It sounds like you're trying to compress a self-extractor. :p What program is it, anyway?
An Inferno one.
@Nx: Peazip? Sounds small...
EDIT: @Nx: That BtRL background on your linux is hot
Peazip is nice and simple (I mostly need an extractor that can handle anything, without nagging me to register it every time), but unfortunately after a few days of use it forgot how to open files when I double clicked them in Explorer. I think I have 7zip on Vista now.
That's Gabe Koerner's reimagined (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oP6PEVWyGF0) Enterprise (http://www.gabekoerner.com/SOTL_Reimagined.jpg) btw.
Is that Ubuntu or Kubuntu Edubuntu?
*EDITED*
And I thought you confused Ubuntu with Kubuntu because I changed the color scheme to blue :lol:
-
No, it's because both of them have pissed me off so much in the last two weeks. :mad:
-
How come?
-
When I try to install on my desktop, it only sees 32 Gb of the HDD some times, and sometimes the full 160. It won't boot most times, and when it does updating it screws it up. I have to update my mobo anyways to accommodate my new CPU, so I'll try again after that. On my mom's laptop, it disables the wireless in Windoze, so it has to be deleted.
-
When I try to install on my desktop, it only sees 32 Gb of the HDD some times, and sometimes the full 160. It won't boot most times, and when it does updating it screws it up. I have to update my mobo anyways to accommodate my new CPU, so I'll try again after that. On my mom's laptop, it disables the wireless in Windoze, so it has to be deleted.
Disables as in you can't use wireless in Windows while Ubuntu is installed?
-
My mom found out that if you held the button down while it started up it worked. I think that the reason is because it's an HP, which have bad Gutsy support. The BroadCom wireless cards are supposed to be supported, though.
-
That's Gabe Koerner's reimagined (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oP6PEVWyGF0) Enterprise (http://www.gabekoerner.com/SOTL_Reimagined.jpg) btw.
:eek: :eek2:...that...that can't be in game...
-
That's Gabe Koerner's reimagined (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oP6PEVWyGF0) Enterprise (http://www.gabekoerner.com/SOTL_Reimagined.jpg) btw.
:eek: :eek2:...that...that can't be in game...
Umm, it's not...
-
I'm getting confused here. I'll try and summarize, feel free to correct me.
- .zip is standard issue on all Windows computers, easy to use and well-known.
- .rar compresses better than .zip and it's easy to use as well.
- .7z is slightly less user-friendly, but you can compress to and extract from all three formats.
- Furthermore, there are loads of other programs that work fine but which hardly anyone (i.e. apart from diehard computer specialists) knows about.
Am I right about this?
-
You're getting confused between the format and the most common program for dealing with that format.
.zip is standard on Windows which means it has a huge userbase. The most common program for unzipping (apart from Windows itself) is WinZip.
.rar and .7z are newer than .zip and do a much better job of compression (important when we are talking about uploading and downloading files). .7z gives slightly better at compression than .rar
The two big programs for those formats are WinRar and 7zip (Although there are other choices). 7zip can extract but not create .rar files. WinRar's most recent version can extract .7z files based on what I've heard on this thread. Don't know if it can create them.
So it basically comes down to how widespread you think your archive will be. An unfinished ship mod is probably best off as a rar or 7z as it's unlikely anyone will download the mod to work on it on a PC where they can't also extract it. On the other hand if you're distributing your game for a bunch of average clueless computer users you're better off with zip as at least they can open it.
-
Most people I know haven't even heard of 7z
Both rar and 7z are very similar, but i'm pretty sure that winrar has many more users.
I think the rar file is the better format as creating them on winrar is alot easier than creating a 7z file.
On the other hand I have only created one 7z file compared to many rar files so I may not know what i'm on about :D
-
∞ Incredible...I agree with PeterC10!!!
...Apocalypse is close! Apocalypse is close!!! :blah: ∞
-
Most people I know haven't even heard of 7z
Both rar and 7z are very similar, but i'm pretty sure that winrar has many more users.
I think the rar file is the better format as creating them on winrar is alot easier than creating a 7z file.
On the other hand I have only created one 7z file compared to many rar files so I may not know what i'm on about :D
How does the user interface have anything to do with which format is better? 7zip is relatively new, so it doesn't have as many users as winrar, and the ui might still be rough around the edges, but the 7z format is actually more efficient than rar.
-
I think the rar file is the better format as creating them on winrar is alot easier than creating a 7z file.
What on Earth do you mean? At least with the current stable version, if you have your files in a folder or folders, just select them, right-click and select "Add to "Yaddayaddayadda.7z"" and you're done. The same goes for extracting. Right-click on an archive and select from the options ranging from "Extract here" to "Extract to...". Simple. Really simple.
-
I think the rar file is the better format as creating them on winrar is alot easier than creating a 7z file.
What on Earth do you mean? At least with the current stable version, if you have your files in a folder or folders, just select them, right-click and select "Add to "Yaddayaddayadda.7z"" and you're done. The same goes for extracting. Right-click on an archive and select from the options ranging from "Extract here" to "Extract to...". Simple. Really simple.
Well I haven't used 7z for ages so I don't know what it is completely like at the moment, I did say that I might not know what I was on about :cool:
-
www.7-zip.org Version 4.57