this post was submitted on 18 Oct 2023
458 points (98.3% liked)

Technology

58150 readers
4922 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] scottywh@lemmy.world 23 points 11 months ago (4 children)

FUCK WINRAR!

it's so stupid and amazing this recent celebration of people that are proud to have paid for it.

It was never a good solution really..

It just worked for what it was for a time... Because it was better than WinZip or pkzip.

7-zip has been amazing for years..

Better OS support would be cool too but it's so unnecessary thanks to 7zip.

[–] pascal@lemm.ee 25 points 11 months ago (1 children)

FUCK WINRAR!

People on Lemmy sometimes get really angry at the dumbest things.

You don't like Winrar, that's your right, chill dude.

[–] InvaderDJ@lemmy.world 19 points 11 months ago (2 children)

WinRAR was great for the time and their policies on paying for the program were extremely generous. Time just overtook it.

[–] MistakenBear32@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 11 months ago

It's essentially just shareware.

More specifically, it's nagware which wasn't particularly uncommon for the time WinRAR was introduced so I don't know that it's particularly generous really when one considers all the other nagware that came out in the late 90s.

It's just one of many different licensing strategies.

In this case it seems to have paid off for the developer as it appears to have resulted in a great deal of fondness and goodwill among a certain portion of the user base.

[–] scottywh@lemmy.world -2 points 11 months ago (2 children)

It was never great.

Their "generous" pay if you want to remove this obnoxious message prompt aside...

It was temporarily useful until better alternatives arose... Which took virtually no time.

[–] InvaderDJ@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago

Back in the day WIndows didn't even have the capability to deal with ZIPs natively. Even if its time was brief (which I honestly don't remember, I think that it was useful for years, almost up to Vista's time) it was useful.

And I do think it generous that this paid software just let you use it after clicking a button with no time limit. Time gave us better options, but I think a lot of people look at WinRAR harsher than it deserves.

[–] wildginger@lemmy.myserv.one 2 points 11 months ago

This revisionist history is so wild I can only assume you are 16 years old and freshly playing on your first computer that you dont need to share

[–] aksdb@feddit.de 6 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

7z recently also had an exploit. It's not magically safer.

RAR compresses significantly faster than 7z (in relation to the compression ratio of course).

RAR has recovery records, 7z doesn't. RAR4 even had cryptographic signatures included. But RAR5 dropped that.

7z is nice, but it's not objectively better than RAR on every account.

[–] marx2k@lemmy.world -2 points 11 months ago

Your can create recovery records, par2, for zip archives

[–] SCB@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

It just worked for what it was for a time… Because it was better than WinZip or pkzip.

Yes this is why it is loved as a piece of software history.

I get you probably were a twinkle in your dad's eye in those days, but that doesn't mean people who were alive then should care less.