What do you want in 2009?
-
Happy New 2009!
We are working hard on 11.5 update for you guys to be released before PA 2010…
Naturally, we want some input on what features do you want us to implement… So pick features you want and let us know with your vote!
-
Unfortunately, I think PPMD (and probably LZMA) in ZIP are unwanted but can’t be avoided - if only to stop the “silly” comparisons ( NN’s Zip is better than PA’s Zip) :mad:
-
think Unicode is a must have to also support non-western fonts. all the other stufff are nice to have options.
-
I think that it would be great to implement JPEG Compression and keep in line with the competition! StuffIT have been doing this for sometime and it comes it very handy. Winzip also have just taken it on in their new vesion.
Now with PowerArchiver 2009 new features including a preview pane it would be great to archive Family photos and view them in compressed format.
-
JPEG are already compressed. There is no big benefit, if compressed images are compressed again in a zip file. inversely there is a higher risk, if a big image archive on a cd-rom is damaged, to loose all images than if you would just store the images separately on a cd
-
any of the new methods included in zip would be standard compliant and compatible with zip standards - so you would be able to open other archives created with same zip specifications.
-
bump
-
JPEG are already compressed. There is no big benefit, if compressed images are compressed again in a zip file. inversely there is a higher risk, if a big image archive on a cd-rom is damaged, to loose all images than if you would just store the images separately on a cd
that would depend if you see 20-30% as big benefit or not :-). On CD, 20%-30% is extra 200 MB of pictures… My family pictures archive is 15 GB which means 3-5 GB of saved space on whatever backup medium I use.
-
This depends of the reason why you want to implement these things (Really want to make some useful features or just for business purposes).
I don’t see any use of this.Just stop copying WinZIP. It is NOT the best archiver.
-
When I need to make a zip file and send it to someone I use Windows’ “Compressed zipped folders” or… WR (sorry, but you should take this one as an example instead). I don’t want to spend my time to make sure witch checkboxes should I use to make my archive compatible with everything. All these “Advanced” zip features should be supported as read-only. IMHO.
-
btw, do you really compress your pictures? and then extract them all the time to view? …
-
@NTFS:
btw, do you really compress your pictures? and then extract them all the time to view? …
it does not matter what me or you do… what matters is what general public does.
How do you backup pictures? If you use 7zip, you still need compatible archiver thats not supported by Windows Compressed Folder.
I mean if 30% is not good enough, why use archiver at all? Just copy and paste everything, it is faster :-).
Besides, implementing decompression is 95% of work for implementing compression… so for us, it is all the same, we already did the work… if you want to use it, you can, if you dont, you dont have to…
And I said million times before, having bz2, ppmd, lzma and jpeg in zip is for me worst thing ever. However we are just drop in the sea, and other people are making zip standards, not us. And those people have 100x the downloads than we do… So we can be stubborn and not support it (which hurts only us, as their users will not use us due to inability to support their files), or we can do it better than them, and still be standard compliant :-).
After few years of being stubborn, we decided that we can do it better than them (or anyone else), and let the users decide if they want to use old zip 2.0 compatible features, or latest zip standards…
-
JPG compression & Multicore support sounds good to me. I would really like to see performance in starting PA and reading large/spanned archives.
-
JPG compression & Multicore support sounds good to me. I would really like to see performance in starting PA and reading large/spanned archives.
there is not much that can be done with regards to speeding up extraction/opening via multicore… main gain would be 2x faster zip compression… of 4x… or 8x, depending on what kind of cpu you have.
-
Application launch time? Anything associated with the words faster, performance, quick is all a plus in my book :D
Whatever 2009 brings, I know it will be great!
-
I would really like to see performance in starting PA and reading large/spanned archives.
I agree with this. This would be great. It also takes a few seconds for the preview to kick in.
-
I would like it to be able to cook me breakfast, make my bed, and pay all my bills.
But, if you can’t add that, I wouldn’t mind seeing an increase in the speed in compression/extraction.
Just my 2 cents.
-
I would like it to be able to cook me breakfast, make my bed, and pay all my bills.
But, if you can’t add that, I wouldn’t mind seeing an increase in the speed in compression/extraction.
Just my 2 cents.
:-).
-
I would like it to be able to cook me breakfast, make my bed…
…
pay all my bills …
and increase in the speed in compression/extraction.Cooking and bed-making :- that’s just being silly.
But the rest is needed and no need to sacrifice one for the rest (I really need something to pay my bills for me) :p -
:-).
