I'm not using 7zip and I won't in near future. Why? Because there's no need for that. RAR and UHARC are good archivers (and what is the definition of good archiver? it should be good and popular).
germo wrote:(and what is the definition of good archiver? it should be good and popular).
definition of good archiver = strong compression, secure of data (no loss) and relatively ease to use.
I'll give it a try. I tried before downloading it but I end up with the installer in a .kgb format. How stupid is that? The archiver is archived in a archive only it can open. How do I get it out ?
Now I see they've put an .exe also
brutalistu wrote:strong compression, secure of data (no loss) and relatively ease to use.
Yes... It's important, but how about sending files to friends? (let's say that this is the main reason why I use archivers). Explaining them which archiver should they use is a waste of time. Why not use RAR or UHARC instead and just send 5% more of data?
Hmm... I'm not saying that you shouldn't use any "new" archivers. It's your choice. It's just all about one question: do I really need that?
if the compression is better, easyer to use and takes less time for put to archive/open archive, yes! I would send to my friends the archive volumes AND the archiver program. As you see it's pretty small.
I will explain them offcourse that is not a random *crap*. In this cathegory enters the unusual codec paks and other sorts of shareware that came with spyware and addaware.
I will test it on my machine first. I care more about my friends machines than mine. I can broke my machine in half becose I'm sure I can fix it back. But them.. they could lose important data and provoke me to a duel or something for that
Nah... it's not about doing any harm to your friends machines. I mean... you force them to use some prog that they wouldn't want to have on their PC's. For eg. I would tell you to send me RAR and not some "experimental" things - which I don't like as you surely noticed.
