The eternal debate

Literal retards
7z is faster, more secure, better at compression, better at multithreaded workloads, and is open source (GPL)

>russian botnet
>foss developed by ukrainian, who are known not to be in good relations with russia
could you be any more retarded

winrar is better due to failsafe operations

Attached: 1snapshot_21.50.png (1920x1080, 3.27M)

this would be the autistic answer but in reality i use 7zip cause it supports more formats than winrar. sfx feature of winrar is really nice but 7zip has a simillar feature which i don't use that often these days.

I hate how ugly Winrar's icon is. 7 Zip isn't much better but at least it doesn't remind me of a geocities site from the 90s.

I get far more better results compressing my 3DS roms with 7z, so I guess they are better.

How is more secure?

Open source software with a small codebase and extremely widespread use = guaranteed thorough informal auditing

I think that the only time I needed winrar's repair thing was about 15 yeas ago when I scratched a CD with some archives.

This.

The one that does not clutter the right click context menu.

There is a debate?

so this is the state of windows users

Tar.

Any examples of error correction in practice? Seems like a holdover of old times where unless it is purely mission critical (and even if it is) it'd be easier/faster to reobtain the source.

Guess what, 7zip was made by a different autistic Russian guy

EC can still be useful if you make backups on DVDs.
(But you can also use a separate program for that.)

>If I don't need something, nobody does
Ebin, just ebin

switched to 7zip this year
god its amazing

Real counter-argument any time.

Duh? The free one?
>Using a GUI instead of the context menu

depends on what you are hiding in your archives OP

What does Winrar EC offer that other backup/recovery solutions don't?

I have been wondering about this lately. What is the real difference between zip arj rar or 7z? Isn't it all just a bastardized copy of pkzip?

Attached: Screenshot at 2019-02-11 19-41-26.png (220x478, 92K)

7zip by far, is this a serious question?

>7zip by far
why? can you say why?

I could

How is this a debate?

7zip shits on it.

7 zip does those too

i'd rather dl the broken part again from somewhere else if available than deal with file restore

7z uses lzma iirc
idk what the rest use

Both look horrible, but 7zip does the job best.

How is it that Windows still haven't incorporated the functionality of these programs in the operating system yet?

Attached: Python Programmer.jpg (212x206, 42K)

I meant Microsoft, what ever.

Compressed folders (zip) were a feature since Windows Me

unar for extracting
tar for archiving

7zip. The only time I ever touched winrar was to learn how to crack software years ago.

>compression software
>look horrible
What did he mean by that?

basedtar xvf *.zip
basedtar xvf *.rar
basedtar xvf *.7z
basedtar xvf *.tar.gz
basedtar xvf *.tar.xz
basedtar xvf *.tar.bz2

If i want performance
7zip

If i want GUI
winrar

/thread
Shouldn't be replying to every post tho

7zip

7zip is free win rar with more stuff

I didn't give you permission to quote me! edit your post right now asshole or else...

>open source
Stop it. It's free software. You don't need to suck corporate cock here.

The one that you are currently using is always the best... case closed

So you're a wintoddler? How about you get the fuck off Jow Forums? :)

Peazip

tar with gz compression

>7zip, it works.
>winrar, has to be shilled.
7zip is better.

Just use Bandizip

for once the reply all is right. tar is unironically based.
on windows peazip/7zip is as good as you can get bc GPL and lots of formats

winrar because it has an option to remove redundant folders from the output.

>Pee zip
my nigar

WinRAR = Sublime Text
7-Zip = Notepad++

You know the answer

7zip because after a while I start feeling guilty about never paying for winrar
Must be Stockholm Syndrome or something

>Not using a Linux distro
you already lost

First of all 7z is a pile of shit because it doesn't even support recovery records. Second of all its SLOW as fuck especially when it comes to extracting archives. RAR5 is like multiple times faster. RAR5 fast is the best preset in terms of compression / time

> geocities site from the 90s.
That was peak Internet back then before all the normies got on.

Win7

It's easy to brute Force those archives anyways

Peazip bestzip

7zip is fast and open sourced

HOLY COW OP JUST ENDED UP POSTING THAT PIC FROM MY BLOG HCTECHBYTE

OP you could have asked me before using my blog article

hctechbyte.wordpress.com/2016/06/13/the-super-benchmark-winrar-5-31-vs-7-zip-16-02/

This was my article, thanks

The pic OP used is from my blog article, RAR5 Fast with solid block compression is the best for general use.

Incorrect, I am the author of the blog article from where OP stole the pic. RAR5 at Fast setting with solid block compression is the fast and most optimal choice for all case uses

First: Your article wasn't used anywhere, only the picture.
Second: The picture came up in the picture search. I didn't even know your blog exsist.
Third: Fuck yourself, pajeet.

no proof fuck off Kevin

also calling me a pajeet does not mean anything in the context of you using my based article and pic lmao

How is this a debate?
One is free and objectively better, the other is a meme (literally, because of the eternal trial) and the only software legally able to create .rar archives, which offer no advantage over .7z anyway.

muh error correction

7z

dtrx