which one is better rar or 7z?

[Jello]

My vote is for rar, tried 7zip but didn't like it.

[Master Razor]

My vote is for rar, tried 7zip but didn't like it.

What didn't you like about it?

[lertsy]

I think that the reason many prefers .rar is that it's more global. As you mentioned in the first post, winrars interface are a lot more developed than 7zips. Therefore my vote goes to .rar even if it might not have the better performance.

[Master Razor]

I think that the reason many prefers .rar is that it's more global.

.
What exactly is this "global" stuff?
7zip can extract rar archives. It can't create rar but WinRAR can open 7z...

[cirulilu]

there are many file archivers that support both rar and 7zip and many other formats. if it's a matter of user interface, search and find the program you like. i personally use haozip that support probably all formats. try it, it's free Haozip, Free compession software with the largest user group in China! Efficient! Utility! Fast!
here is an incomplete list of file archivers Comparison of file archivers - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[anon]

I think that the reason many prefers .rar is that it's more global. As you mentioned in the first post, winrars interface are a lot more developed than 7zips.

7-Zip's interface keeps it simple.

Hey lertsy

[Master Razor]

Haozip bloated:

* Support virtual CD-ROM mounting

-- drivers that will load on windows boot

* Powerful dual-core Trojan horse checking engine

-- horrible performance when extracting an 8GB archive

* MD5 comparison function

-- most users don't even know what that is. And if they do, there more than just MD5.

[fuzzy]

Do we really need to vote on which is a better archive type. I personally don't like either and use zip, cause I end up on a lot of computers that don't have file archivers installed. As for compression I don't care. These days nobody does anymore and archives have become containers to group a bunch of files or split larger files. We have so much space available that nobody uses archives anymore for what they were intended.
I might be wrong here but I see this poll as one of convenience not one of usability as the whole dynamic of the compression world has changed over the years when it comes to end users.
Use rar or 7z, or zip or gzip, tar or uharc doesn't really matter as long as it gets the job done.

[Master Razor]

Use rar or 7z, or zip or gzip, tar or uharc doesn't really matter as long as it gets the job done.

What about performance?
The time varies even when no compression is used (ie. just use a container). That and the performance impact on the os. Context menus and other crap take up system resources too you know.

[svartevarg]

most packers in scene/p2p use rar....ao most people just go with it

[Master Razor]

most packers in scene/p2p use rar....ao most people just go with it

If I'm not mistaken, aren't scene releases packed with both rar and zip?

[slikrapid]

Q:

What exactly is this "global" stuff?

A:

most packers in scene/p2p use rar....ao most people just go with it

aren't scene releases packed with both rar and zip?

prevalently rar, zip is still used due to traditional reasons in sections like: 0day, apps, games (small-size stuff)


whether 7z is somewhat more powerful or not doesn't matter, its good to have competent alternatives (in case the one(s) you use become bloatware, etc.)

[Okaim]

$5 to whoever can tell me why this thread was created

So we can earn 5$..

[anon]

Well, no one has answered yet

[Okaim]

Well, no one has answered yet

My answer is still intact, despite the paradox.