1

Topic: Popularity of different archivers among programmers

One week ago I launched this inquiry: What archivers use? The author: Lazytech Date: 11.05 18:36 Question: Today to me informed that it is better not to send archives.7z to whom got. The pier, archives Zip is more preferable, because  at all open. Here I also became thoughtful... Considering that is a forum of programmers, I was surprised a little with small popularity of such archivers, as ZPAQ and FreeArc. I did not begin to add them in inquiry not to affect purity of experiment.

2

Re: Popularity of different archivers among programmers

Hello, Lazytech, you wrote: L> Considering that is a forum of programmers, I was surprised a little with small popularity of such archivers, as ZPAQ and FreeArc. I did not begin to add them in inquiry not to affect purity of experiment. I love 7zip and I use it. But to the people who have been not connected to IT, I always send simply zip. And it justifies itself.

3

Re: Popularity of different archivers among programmers

Hello, Lazytech, you wrote: I Will support the comment above. I use 7zip for the personal purposes. But I exchange with others only in zip.

4

Re: Popularity of different archivers among programmers

Hello, Lazytech, you wrote: L> One week ago I launched this inquiry: What archivers use? The author: Lazytech Date: 11.05 18:36 Question: Today to me informed that it is better not to send archives.7z to whom got. The pier, archives Zip is more preferable, because  at all open. Here I also became thoughtful... L> Considering that is a forum of programmers, I was surprised a little with small popularity of such archivers, as ZPAQ and FreeArc. I did not begin to add them in inquiry not to affect purity of experiment. You so raised the question that I answered "better not to send". Figs it knows where open it is necessary that can on what to the remote machine where  except zip is not present.  any percent it is not necessary a haemoplenty.  I though and 7z happen I press but I do zip if that that  is possible tar.gz.

5

Re: Popularity of different archivers among programmers

Hello, Nuzhny, you wrote: N> I love 7zip and I use it. But to the people who have been not connected to IT, I always send simply zip. And it justifies itself. I already understood it. On the other hand, sometimes it is useful to advise to people to use something new. I remember, how to me once sent the link to the videoclip which has been laid out on normal  (, Yandex. A disk), instead of on a video hosting like YouTube. I spent two hours for downloading of this roller and when launched it, it appeared that video is encoded with  20 Mbit\s. I will especially mark that the person who has sent to me the link, not any teapot, and the programmer.

6

Re: Popularity of different archivers among programmers

Hello, Lazytech, you wrote: L> One week ago I launched this inquiry: What archivers use? The author: Lazytech Date: 11.05 18:36 Question: Today to me informed that it is better not to send archives.7z to whom got. The pier, archives Zip is more preferable, because  at all open. Here I also became thoughtful... gzip is not the archiver, and the compressor. The archiver is something that takes a small group  and transforms into one, thus it is desirable compressed. gzip takes one file and compresses it. gzip becomes the archiver if to apply it in a combination with tar' or cpio. Personally to me to spit on superfluous some percent . I use zip, something to send not-juniksoidu because any person can unpack zip, and tar.gz for myself and for dialogue with unixoids because it to me is customary and consequently that he understands specific for  features, type of access rights to files and symbolical links. I will not vote, excuse. I generally rarely vote.

7

Re: Popularity of different archivers among programmers

Hello, GarryIV, you wrote: GIV> You so raised the question that I answered "better not to send". Figs it knows where open it is necessary that can on what to the remote machine where  except zip is not present.  any percent it is not necessary a haemoplenty.  I though and 7z happen I press but I do zip if that that  is possible tar.gz. I by naivety thought that presently 7-Zip is installed on every second computer. I will remind, this archiver can be used absolutely free of charge even in the commercial organizations.

8

Re: Popularity of different archivers among programmers

Hello, Pzz, you wrote: Pzz> Personally to me to spit on superfluous some percent . I use zip, something to send not-juniksoidu because any person can unpack zip, and tar.gz for myself and for dialogue with unixoids because it to me is customary and consequently that he understands specific for  features, type of access rights to files and symbolical links. I will remind if to pack a little well compressed files of the similar content into the continuous archive.7z its size can turn out not for some percent, and in times it is less in comparison with archive Zip.

9

Re: Popularity of different archivers among programmers

Hello, Lazytech, you wrote: L> I Will remind if to pack a little well compressed files of the similar content into the continuous archive.7z its size can turn out not for some percent, and in times it is less in comparison with archive Zip. Perhaps probably. But if to compress that I (normally compress the source codes, sometimes executed files, broad gulls and similar dregs) normally it is impossible.

10

Re: Popularity of different archivers among programmers

11

Re: Popularity of different archivers among programmers

12

Re: Popularity of different archivers among programmers

Hello, Lazytech, you wrote: L> One week ago I launched this inquiry: I Use the program 7zip, but ALL archives with its help I do exceptional in zip. L> Considering that is a forum of programmers, I was surprised a little with small popularity of such archivers, as ZPAQ and FreeArc. And what for they are necessary?

13

Re: Popularity of different archivers among programmers

Hello, Lazytech, you wrote: L> One week ago I launched this inquiry: What archivers use? The author: Lazytech Date: 11.05 18:36 Question: Today to me informed that it is better not to send archives.7z to whom got. The pier, archives Zip is more preferable, because  at all open. Here I also became thoughtful... At zip there is a problem - standard  the browser zip does not support Russian-speaking names of files in . And  zip, accordingly, is able only in . To use zpaq for archiving of files - from a gun on sparrows. So my choice - zip/7z for  and tar.bz2 for  (tar.gz if it is necessary to pack big or  files).

14

Re: Popularity of different archivers among programmers

Hello, Pzz, you wrote: Pzz> Perhaps probably. But if to compress that I (normally compress the source codes, sometimes executed files, broad gulls and similar dregs) normally it is impossible. Well here  and especially broad gulls press close on the contrary, very well.

15

Re: Popularity of different archivers among programmers

Hello, AlexRK, you wrote: ARK> And what for they are necessary? FreeArc quickly and very well compresses files. Besides, it is one of few archivers, able to add to archive the information for recovery in case of damage. Well, and ZPAQ - simply abrupt console archiver (truth, itself about it only read).

16

Re: Popularity of different archivers among programmers

Hello, scf, you wrote: scf> to Use zpaq for archiving of files - from a gun on sparrows. And for what it should be used?

17

Re: Popularity of different archivers among programmers

Hello, Lazytech, you wrote: L> FreeArc quickly and very well compresses files. . Well, if I round the clock was engaged in compression of files, probably, it would have serious value. And so... For home needs of a zip suffices above a roof. L> Besides, it is one of few archivers, able to add to archive the information for recovery in case of damage. The pleasant trifle, but  all the same does not replace. L> well, and ZPAQ - simply abrupt console archiver (truth, itself about it only read). Clearly. But personally I am too lazy to enjoy a steepness of archivers.

18

Re: Popularity of different archivers among programmers

Hello, Lazytech, you wrote: L> Hello, scf, you wrote: scf>> to Use zpaq for archiving of files - from a gun on sparrows. L> and for what it should be used? The best application for the incremental archiver - incremental .

19

Re: Popularity of different archivers among programmers

Hello, scf, you wrote: scf> the best application for the incremental archiver - incremental . It agree. If that, I did not suggest to use ZPAQ to pack files for transfer.

20

Re: Popularity of different archivers among programmers

Hello, AlexRK, you wrote: ARK> Hm. Well, if I round the clock was engaged in compression of files, probably, it would have serious value. And so... For home needs of a zip suffices above a roof. For example, I have some files of a format.pptx, everyone in the size less than 4 MB (these are different versions of the same presentation). Their total size - about 25,6 MB. If to pack them into archive Zip, the file in the size about 25,6 MB turns out. If I pack them into indispensable archive.7z or.arc the file size will be less than 4 MB. There is a difference? ARK> the pleasant trifle, but  all the same does not replace. To one another does not hinder.

21

Re: Popularity of different archivers among programmers

Hello, Lazytech, you wrote: L> For example, I have some files of a format.pptx, everyone in the size less than 4 MB (these are different versions of the same presentation). Their total size - about 25,6 MB. If to pack them into archive Zip, the file in the size about 25,6 MB turns out. If I pack them into indispensable archive.7z or.arc the file size will be less than 4 MB. There is a difference? The difference, of course, is. And, as I suspect, not only in size, but also in speed of unpacking-zapakovki. I have zip-archives in the size in some gigabyte, access to contents very fast. Well and personally for me the size of archive really has no great value - there is a screw on 4 terabytes, from them 3 is free.

22

Re: Popularity of different archivers among programmers

Hello, Lazytech, you wrote: L> Considering that is a forum of programmers, me small popularity of such archivers, as ZPAQ ZPAQ a little surprised it not for archiving, it for creation . Very good piece for this purpose. It very abruptly compresses counterparts since it is oriented on  by full or partial  files in , and is able to create incremental  that very abruptly. I.e. you take to yourself and once a week a folder you merge in such archive - and he adds changes, instead of compresses all successively. It abruptly. But application directly we tell infrequent and it is exact not for transfer of the given data between users.

23

Re: Popularity of different archivers among programmers

Hello, Pzz, you wrote: Pzz> Perhaps probably. But if to compress that I (normally compress the source codes, sometimes executed files, broad gulls and similar dregs) normally it is impossible. Here with broad gulls just very much it can turn out. At 7zip there is a mode of compression PPmd - it is just very good for text files. And if it is necessary to compress  dens 7-zip in a mode ppmd, maximum can yield result many times less than zip.

24

Re: Popularity of different archivers among programmers

To send I will recommend in zip (if there are no its special reasons to avoid). For that simple reason that it opens in any OS without presence of any software. Itself always I put 7z. For that simple reason that often it is necessary to deal.rar, and WinRAR it is a piece paid. Other programmers not especially anxious by questions of license purity, normally put WinRAR, the interface at it is more pleasant. The  I store in 7z because it compresses better, and I pay for a taken place. About other formats, as far as I know, 7z it is one of the best, and it is direct the last kilobytes to me it is not necessary to save, therefore other formats did not use. Can in vain, but nevertheless exotic formats it is possible years through 20 and not to unpack, and 7z hardly somewhere gets to. Somehow so.

25

Re: Popularity of different archivers among programmers

Hello, AlexRK, you wrote: ARK> the Difference, of course, is. And, as I suspect, not only in size, but also in speed of unpacking-zapakovki. I have zip-archives in the size in some gigabyte, access to contents very fast. In  rapid access to contents normally is not required, and here concerning the small size is very much even well. ARK> well and personally for me the size of archive really has no great value - there is a screw on 4 terabytes, from them 3 is free. And at me the CPU with  kernels, from them three four kernels are normally free.