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

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

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

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.

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

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

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

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
(")_(")

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
(")_(")

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."

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."

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...

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...

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...

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...