If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Solved: Explorer gradually eating up memory
On Sat, 11 Mar 2017 16:44:05 -0700, Ken Blake
wrote: On Sat, 11 Mar 2017 17:57:48 -0500, "Mayayana" wrote: "Ken Blake" wrote I almost never create new archives, and was interested in it only for unzipping. But I finally decided that it was no better than recent versions of Windows own ability to unzip files, simply treating a zip file as a folder. For plain vanilla unzipping, Windows is fine. OK, thanks. You're confirming what I already thought. Personally I prefer to have a program. The way that Windows pretends it's a folder is confusing. Nil said much the same thing. But I don't find it confusing and I like the way Windows does it. I also make ZIPs, a lot. And I sometimes make SFX ZIPs. OK. As I said, I almost never do. I can't remember the last time I did it. Then there are other formats, like .gz, .tar, etc. I'm not sure anything but Winrar can open RAR. Fortunately it's extremely uncommon. And I also never deal with any format beside .zip. One of the reasons I like WinRar is because binary groups post in the rar format. In order to post a large binary file it has to be broken into smaller pieces and WinRar is the program that is used for this purpose. If you never post/download anything from a binary group then you don't need WinRar. For example, I download TV shows from a.b.teevee because they remove the commercials; all posts are in the Rar format. I could not be without WinRar and it is one of the first programs I install. Winrar does everything that Winzip and 7-Zip can do plus it is the primary tool for posting/downloading large binaries on Usenet and some other places. -- JT |
Ads |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Solved: Explorer gradually eating up memory
Ken Blake wrote:
But I don't find it confusing and I like the way Windows does it. You mean like this example ? Count me out. https://s3.postimg.org/wfr8et7mb/cab...ntegration.gif So how did I eventually find it ? 1) "Open Containing Folder". 2) Use the folder navigation bar to locate the path information. https://s27.postimg.org/mslriarun/convenience.gif Oozes convenience. ******* That was WinXP. On Windows 7, even after multiple attempts, I cannot get that level of integration. I placed the test ZIP in my Downloads folder on the Win7 machine. I tried both settings of the ZIP file extension, rebuilt the index, and Windows Search refused to find "UXPUTTY.C" inside the ZIP. Only the file name of the ZIP seemed to respond to a search for "putty". The right-click context menu, offers "Extract All" for the ZIP in question. But there's no confusion involving the contents of the ZIP. So it does seem to be behaving in a more reasonable manner. In that situation, there's not much difference between Windows "Extract All" and using 7ZIP.exe, which has its ShellEx entries in the same menu pane. Am I missing some setting in Windows 7 ? The result looks too "reasonable" :-) Paul |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Solved: Explorer gradually eating up memory
Justin Tyme wrote:
On Sat, 11 Mar 2017 16:44:05 -0700, Ken Blake wrote: On Sat, 11 Mar 2017 17:57:48 -0500, "Mayayana" wrote: "Ken Blake" wrote I almost never create new archives, and was interested in it only for unzipping. But I finally decided that it was no better than recent versions of Windows own ability to unzip files, simply treating a zip file as a folder. For plain vanilla unzipping, Windows is fine. OK, thanks. You're confirming what I already thought. Personally I prefer to have a program. The way that Windows pretends it's a folder is confusing. Nil said much the same thing. But I don't find it confusing and I like the way Windows does it. I also make ZIPs, a lot. And I sometimes make SFX ZIPs. OK. As I said, I almost never do. I can't remember the last time I did it. Then there are other formats, like .gz, .tar, etc. I'm not sure anything but Winrar can open RAR. Fortunately it's extremely uncommon. And I also never deal with any format beside .zip. One of the reasons I like WinRar is because binary groups post in the rar format. In order to post a large binary file it has to be broken into smaller pieces and WinRar is the program that is used for this purpose. If you never post/download anything from a binary group then you don't need WinRar. For example, I download TV shows from a.b.teevee because they remove the commercials; all posts are in the Rar format. I could not be without WinRar and it is one of the first programs I install. Winrar does everything that Winzip and 7-Zip can do plus it is the primary tool for posting/downloading large binaries on Usenet and some other places. -- JT 7ZIP can decompress RAR. Eugene Roshal offers free decompression, but compression for RAR should always cost money. I don't know if Igor Pavlov just uses a binary blob for decompression of RAR, or whether the decompressor is written from first principles. At one point, 7ZIP had a tiny bit of trouble with RAR. There was some difference between opening a "self extractor" type RAR, versus a RAR without EXE code inside it. I haven't tested to see if that was fixed or not. Generally, decompressors seek to avoid the self-extractor EXE in a file, because of the malware risk. If a decompressor can manage it, it should ignore the EXE section, for safety reasons. This is yet another reason why I like to use standalone tools for handling stuff like that. 7ZIP combines pre-processors with compression. For example, if you present a folder with EXE files in it, another guy wrote a pre-processor for EXE, which re-encoding the file to save space. After that step is done, the mechanical 7ZIP compression is carried out on it. Even the RAR tool is likely to have a copy of that preprocessor in it. I have no idea how such a step, makes a difference to entropy. Even without pre-processing, the compressor should still get the same compression factor from it. Paul |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Solved: Explorer gradually eating up memory
On 11 Mar 2017, Ken Blake wrote in
alt.windows7.general: OK, thanks. I very seldom have a need for anything other than zip, so that's almost meaningless to me. "Seldom" isn't "never", which means that you DO sometimes need to deal with something besides ZIP. Then what do you do? Among other things, 7-Zip can open some program installation archives, and .ISO disk image files. I find that very convenient. And I dislike the way Windows tries to present archive files as folders. And I like the way it does it. We're all different. They aren't folders, they don't act like folders, and I can't use them like folders, so it's annoying to me that they look like folders. And I know from experience that they confuse users who don't understand the difference. |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Solved: Explorer gradually eating up memory
On Sat, 11 Mar 2017 12:35:11 -0700, Ken Blake
wrote: I also had 7-zip installed, but no longer do, for a different reason. I almost never create new archives, and was interested in it only for unzipping. But I finally decided that it was no better than recent versions of Windows own ability to unzip files, simply treating a zip file as a folder. I also tried Winzip and felt the same way about it. So to you, and Paul, and Wolf, and anyone else who likes 7-zip or Winzip, let me ask you what am I missing. What can one of these programs do for me over and above what Windows does? For what you're doing, the built-in unzip capabilities should be just fine. It doesn't sound like you're asking for much, or expecting much. For me, I unzip zip files only occasionally. The vast majority of the time I'm creating or unzipping (unraring?) RAR archives, and the built-in functionality doesn't help me. I work with RAR files throughout the workday, 5 days a week, plus weekends if I need to catch up on something. Even with zip files, though, the built-in unzip functionality is incredibly poorly implemented, especially given how many years MS has been able to think about it. In the file pane of Win Explorer, the context menu for a zip file is completely worthless. In the folder pane of WE, all you get is an Extract All... dialog that's really clunky to use. In comparison, WinRAR lets you select from a wide range of context menu items, in either pane of WE, including a similar (but far more functional) Extract Files dialog, but I also enable the Extract Here item, the Extract To folder name that matches the archive name item, and the Test Archive item. If I select multiple archives, another menu item gets included, Extract Each Archive to a Separate Folder, where each folder is named after the respective archive that will be placed there. Of course, there are all of the usual menu items such as those related to adding new files to an existing archive, etc. Bottom line, if you're occasionally unzipping a zip file, you're not missing a thing. You probably won't even be bothered with how clunky the Windows implementation is. It works, and that may be all that matters. -- Char Jackson |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Solved: Explorer gradually eating up memory
On 11 Mar 2017 19:46:45 GMT, Nil wrote:
On 11 Mar 2017, Ken Blake wrote in alt.windows7.general: So to you, and Paul, and Wolf, and anyone else who likes 7-zip or Winzip, let me ask you what am I missing. What can one of these programs do for me over and above what Windows does? Handle more compressed formats. And I dislike the way Windows tries to present archive files as folders. Back in the XP days, I used to unregister the Windows zip.dll (or whatever it was called) in order to get Windows to treat zip archives as regular files. The last thing I wanted was that kind of helpfulness. -- Char Jackson |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Solved: Explorer gradually eating up memory
On Sat, 11 Mar 2017 17:43:10 -0800, Justin Tyme
wrote: One of the reasons I like WinRar is because binary groups post in the rar format. In order to post a large binary file it has to be broken into smaller pieces and WinRar is the program that is used for this purpose. If you never post/download anything from a binary group then you don't need WinRar. For example, I download TV shows from a.b.teevee because they remove the commercials; all posts are in the Rar format. I could not be without WinRar and it is one of the first programs I install. Winrar does everything that Winzip and 7-Zip can do plus it is the primary tool for posting/downloading large binaries on Usenet and some other places. My primary purpose for using RAR is more boring. My colleagues and I use it to get our work files through the ravenous corporate email filter. Zipped attachments get unzipped and stripped, while RAR attachments sail right through. -- Char Jackson |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Solved: Explorer gradually eating up memory
En el artículo , Ken Blake
escribió: So to you, and Paul, and Wolf, and anyone else who likes 7-zip or Winzip, let me ask you what am I missing. What can one of these programs do for me over and above what Windows does? If you'd read my OP, you'd have seen that I installed Winzip to decompress a zipfile that the Windows unzipper wouldn't touch (it just opened an empty folder). Linux command line zip and Winzip both decompressed it ok. -- (\_/) (='.'=) systemd: the Linux version of Windows 10 (")_(") |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Solved: Explorer gradually eating up memory
En el artículo , Nil
escribió: And I dislike the way Windows tries to present archive files as folders. +1. They could have used a different colour or something. -- (\_/) (='.'=) systemd: the Linux version of Windows 10 (")_(") |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Solved: Explorer gradually eating up memory
In message , Nil
writes: On 11 Mar 2017, Ken Blake wrote in alt.windows7.general: OK, thanks. I very seldom have a need for anything other than zip, so that's almost meaningless to me. "Seldom" isn't "never", which means that you DO sometimes need to deal with something besides ZIP. Then what do you do? Among other things, 7-Zip can open some program installation archives, and .ISO disk image files. I find that very convenient. Useful to know; if I did know that, I'd forgotten. And I dislike the way Windows tries to present archive files as folders. And I like the way it does it. We're all different. On the whole, I _do_ like it. (Yes, I accept that the find function won't find archive contents; it had never occurred to me that it should.) I dislike the inconsistency of it: I'm mainly using XP, and sometimes - I haven't divined the criterion/a - it _doesn't_ present ..zip files as folders; this may be better under 7. (There _have_ been times when I wished I could turn it off [Char's method of unregistering some .dll would be a bit clunky though as I'd only _sometimes_ like to turn it off], but then I often wish Windows Explorer wouldn't auto-open ordinary folders, and I live with that.) They aren't folders, they don't act like folders, and I can't use them like folders, so it's annoying to me that they look like folders. And I Well, you can drag files (and folders) from them, so in that respect they _do_ act like folders. (I haven't tried dragging _to_ them.) know from experience that they confuse users who don't understand the difference. I can see that, yes. -- J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf As the man said when confronted by a large dinner salad, "This isn't food. This is what food eats." |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
Solved: Explorer gradually eating up memory
In message , Char Jackson
writes: [] My primary purpose for using RAR is more boring. My colleagues and I use it to get our work files through the ravenous corporate email filter. Zipped attachments get unzipped and stripped, while RAR attachments sail right through. Did it see through _passworded_ .zip files? (Or just strip those completely [even if you renamed them to something other than .zip]?) -- J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf As the man said when confronted by a large dinner salad, "This isn't food. This is what food eats." |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Solved: Explorer gradually eating up memory
On Fri, 10 Mar 2017 14:55:45 +0000, Mike Tomlinson wrote:
En el artículo , Stan Brown escribió: Bizarre! Which version of Winzip, out of curiosity? v21.0 I've never liked it, but had to install it to unzip a file that the built-in Windows unzipper didn't like. ?? I agree that you had to install _some_ unzipper, but I don't see why you installed one you don't like, when there are so many to choose from. I actually bought WinZip, years ago, but they wouldn't let me transfer the license to my new computer. I installed 7zip, which is free, and I like it much better. -- Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Tompkins County, New York, USA http://BrownMath.com/ http://OakRoadSystems.com/ Shikata ga nai... |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Solved: Explorer gradually eating up memory
On Sat, 11 Mar 2017 07:35:49 +0000, Mike Tomlinson wrote:
7-zip When started it opens the file previously being worked on, and somehow by trying to create a new archive, I end up trashing that. I don't find it intuitive. Might just be me. I had to open my copy to see that you're right, because I never use it that way. It's much easier to select a file, use the right-click menu to create an archive, then drag any additional files into the archive. -- Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Tompkins County, New York, USA http://BrownMath.com/ http://OakRoadSystems.com/ Shikata ga nai... |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Solved: Explorer gradually eating up memory
On Sat, 11 Mar 2017 03:49:08 -0500, Paul wrote:
Right-click and 7ZIP : Add To Archive It will always suggest the worst choice of folder to store it in, and new filename, so some edits will be necessary at that point. Really? For me it suggests the folder that the original file is in. -- Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Tompkins County, New York, USA http://BrownMath.com/ http://OakRoadSystems.com/ Shikata ga nai... |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
Solved: Explorer gradually eating up memory
On 11 Mar 2017 19:46:45 GMT, Nil wrote:
On 11 Mar 2017, Ken Blake wrote in alt.windows7.general: So to you, and Paul, and Wolf, and anyone else who likes 7-zip or Winzip, let me ask you what am I missing. What can one of these programs do for me over and above what Windows does? Handle more compressed formats. And create passworded archives. And I dislike the way Windows tries to present archive files as folders. Me too. I don't like not knowing whether a folder is areal folder (dragging a file outside removes it) or an archive folder (dragging a file also leaves it in the original location). -- Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Tompkins County, New York, USA http://BrownMath.com/ http://OakRoadSystems.com/ Shikata ga nai... |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|