ITT: Alternatives that are just as good

Not better than. Not worse than. Just as good.

Let's see how much we can come up with.

Other urls found in this thread:

peazip.org/
mattmahoney.net/dc/zpaq.html
ultimateworlds.com/799/sony-developed-185-terabytes-record-cassette-tape/
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

7z is multiplatform, that's a huge advantage in itself. It wouldn't matter how good Winrar is if I can't use it.

7z gui is butt ugly. and barely usable
winrar isnt much better either

You usually don't even use the GUI. You use right click context menu for the most part...the zipping GUI works just fine and isn't an eye sore

WinRAR is still ahead because of its recovery features and superior UI.

winrar is garbage compared to 7zip

>winrar
>double click file
>drag contents out

>7z
>double click file
>frag contents out

I never understood what people meant when they said winrars gui is better, do they just like the fuckhuge icons?

>frag contents out

Does 7z support RAR5?

...

tar -J (.xz) can into lmza2 compression, same as 7zip.
7zip doesn't preserve timestamps, so use tar -J instead for you're GNU/Linux archiving needs.

7zip also comes with a pretty neet checksum tool on Windows, too.

Just go linux and have an app for every archive type

MPC-HC and MPV.

Have used both, prefer mpc.

Not correct. RAR5 compression is both more powerful and faster than 7z.

Lel, just who credibly determined this to be the case?

There are only a handful relevant ones and manuals are gunzipped so they load fast in case you forget some options.

.zip
.tar
.rar
.7z
.dmg

Nah, without MadVR mpv is better than MPC-HC. With MadVR they are about equal. mpv still offers more customizability and youtube-dl support though.

I had to keep WinRAR installed because once in a while 7zip just throws CRC errors, even though the file is OK.
Even happened on files I packed myself.
Only thing 7z have over Winrar is the encryption on file names that I could maybe consider useful.

So if I have a folder with multiple videos does mpv open them in correct order and be able to jump from file to file by a click of a button without having to edit a bunch of shit?

>Lel, just who credibly determined this to be the case?

RAR has ALWAYS been better than 7z (7z is stupidly slow), and RAR5 also improves the compression by a lot.

Sadly it now compresses audio worse, but for every other workload, it is better than 7z.

Feel free to look up any benchmark.

It can, but you need to configure it.
It's just as capable if not more. Just not retard proof.

>It can, but you need to configure it.
I knew this already since I'm the one making the migration config for mpv, just wanted to see how people outside that thread behaves.

that equasion returns a nil error
because it's false

they're pretty equivalent in my mind too. 7-zip is slightly faster with 7z (obviously) and xz. winrar is faster with zip and rar. the difference is negligible in day-to-day use.

exactly. 99% of the time I right-click and extract, or right-click and compress. the start menu icons and GUI almost seem superfluous.

also
virtualbox and virtual PC
virtualbox is better for non-windows, and virtual PC is better for most windows (between 95 and 7), but both work in most cases anyway.

and acdsee classic and xnview (highly customized settings)

Chrome and Firefox

7zip is better because it's free software.

Firefox allows more customization like letting you disable what you want. Speeds are negligable for me.

both shit

I saw someone using both 7zip and winrar. When I asked him why both, he just said because of "reasons"

what the fuck was all that about

I used to use WinRAR but sometimes it mangled Japanese filenames/music tags, so I switched to 7zip and never had the problem again.

Unfortunately I still have some files from before I switched.

PeaZip
peazip.org/

...

mpd+ncmpcpp = cmus
they are both good in their own ways

Are you retarded or just pretending?

7zip and winrar use two different compression algorithms, and the idea that you can judge the two based on their interface is as stupid as it is ignorant.

I use right click to compress and the gui to decompress.

>that colour scheme
>only jap music
>all those fucking playlists
Is this autism visualized?

Is this the foobar circlejerk thread?

>compression speed
>difference of 10mb size
>mattering at all
What is this, the 90's? Who the fuck cares about the tiny differences when 99% of content people pack into archives is already compressed to shit.

Also 7z default options for compression is shit use -ms=off to get the same behavior as winrar.

7zip works on Linux (it's called p7zip), and it has a CLI client. Not to mention that for Linux archives you're generally just using tar.

>I used to use WinRAR but sometimes it mangled Japanese filenames/music tags, so I switched to 7zip and never had the problem again.
That isn't how tagging works. They literally can't change file content. Also the only archive type that mangles filenames is zip and that is because the standard is old shit that only supports the american alphabet. Winrar is the only one that implements a workaround for that that only works in winrar.

it also comes with p7zipForFilemanager when you have wxwidgets installed. There is no documentation for it but you can take a look at the kde service files to see what arguments it uses for what. Really handy if you ask me.

I was kinda hoping this thread would have more examples where the alternative is just as good, instead everyone is just talking about winrar and 7zip. At least OP was right in that part.

You can theme 7Zip and 7Zip icons.

>he uses windows and complains
GTK2 version of xarchiver here. It's pretty comfy.

Doesn't foobar let you auto tag files depending on the file location/path?

If you use the context menu for winrar it does retarded shit like unrar the files to the c driver regardless of where they end up, not sure about 7zip as I only use it when winrar shits the bed as rar is natively supported in everything I use, 7zip is not and if im going to use one or the other I would rather use the one that works natively.

winrar feels like a professional program, even my old ass copy from 2011 feels like it was professionally made, from the icon down to the little details.

7zip while good and possibly better performance wise, feels like free shit, not in a good way. program is great, but it FEELS free, and that is never a good thing.

WinRAR can't mangle tags and it can't mangle filenames either, provided the filenames are in proper UTF8 (if they aren't, 7z would screw them up too).

And there's a codepage converter for Foobar that can fix them.

Not every content is pre-compressed, and some people work with large data sets. Take 5 gig dictionary files for example.

Just use Peazip. Its the best opensource altenative to WinRar or similar product on the market.

>Comparing file extension with program
Retard

but user winrar is so much better. why you not stop sucking stallmans cock.software communist cuck

7zip corrupts files. People using 7zip only use it for fun.

>not using WinRK
>2007+10

7zip is GPL licensed with an exception for the non-free unrar part.
p7zip will show 7z options in the gui for fileroller and others.
You can have an identical to windows 7zip gui pop up from the context menu of your file manager by usiing a custom .desktop file. There's ones for kde and gnome file manager but I couldn't find one for nemo, and failed at a couple attempts to make my own.
>disappointface.jpg

>not using lrzip

>winrar feels like a professional program

This is a new kind of bait.

yea, you don't know the difference between free and paid software and it shows.

...

Did you actually pay for WinRAR?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

the fact you think that really shows how retarded you are.

>hurr durr I was only pretending to be retarded

>not using ZPAQ
mattmahoney.net/dc/zpaq.html
It is so far ahead of the rest, it isn't funny.
>faster than 7-zip at normal ratios comparable to 7-zip's
>faster than freearc at extreme ratios
>append-only archives, meaning it's good for backups
>none of the legacy hurdles of tar

lrzip can use zpaq with a switch :^)

It's only suitable for archival purposes since no one fucking uses it or knows how to open such files, so it's fucking useless.

And tar can use the same compression as 7 zip anyways.
With timestamps
see

I understand that it only uses ZPAQ's compressor. Is that right?

It's a chicken and egg problem.

No

I meant that it only uses ZPAQ's _compressor_, not that it _only_ uses ZPAQ's compressor. That is, it doesn't implement the whole archive format.

Why are you posting are screenshot in a discussion about how a program feels to use?

>it FEELS free, and that is never a good thing
Kill yourself you dog :/

you trying to tell me shit programed for free by what is likely someone autistic is ever going to feel good to use?

>going to feel good to use?
I literally need you to take my money so i can feel good

pic related, its you

If you can't afford to pay the licence fee for a software then use your beloved libre communist alternative and stop leeching off of somebody's else's work. WinRAR has been irrelevant for more than a decade anyway, there are least equal alternatives and the decompression engine isn't proprietary anyways, you're just not allowed to reverse-engineer the unpacker to get the compression algorithm because of course some NEET neckbeard with too much time on his hands would do that รก la Stallman style.

if its cheap enough I would pay for a program that feels good over a better one if both easily met my needs and then some, which both winrar and 7zip are.

>not using atools for your archiving needs in Linux
>having to memorize 10 different commands with each one having its own retarded syntax format
>instead of apack archive.rar path/to/files/*
Do you have a mental disability m8?

It's more likely you. Because you can't have a photo of an user you don't even know IRL.

I bet you're a mac user.

>badass mental disorder

You got me with that one user, you're gonna become a great politician some day with those debating skills of yours.

>Comparing file extension with program

Did you just got your panties in a bunch because I referred to 7zip (application) as 7z (extension)?

>Who the fuck cares about the tiny differences
...

how messy is your room?

Pretty messy after your mom left last night.

windows, how a program feels to use is important, there are many image viewers, there are many free ones, and there are many that can look inside a zip or rar file, but almost universally they are shit at it even if they can do it.

in comes acdsee, literally does everything right that every fucking free image viewer gets wrong. more then willing to pay for software I use every day that makes my life just that much easier.

>winrar feels like a professional program
there is zero difference between Sup Forums and a microsoft billboard in india at this point.

not funny at all. and you lost the argument. double loser.

because free programs constantly feel like crap to use because the people who make them and then decided their time is worthless are autistic as fuck and cant ui to save their fucking lives.

>135$ just because it feels nice
>just fuck my asshole after you're done thanks!

tar is a pretty good format.
It's literally a file you can blast to a tape drive for backup.
Then tar.X is just the same tar with some form of compression applied. I've stopped using anything else because these things are so handy.

It was pretty funny to me xDDD

>tape
like VCR tape? rofl do freetards still live in the 60s?

Tape is just about as dense as you are.
ultimateworlds.com/799/sony-developed-185-terabytes-record-cassette-tape/

185 TB of tape
lol

considering I have been on the same software for over 10 years and it still works, money well spent.