BETA: PowerArchiver 2023 - 22.10.02

[spwolf]

do you have compression profiles set, or anything other than default installation? Did you reboot your computer after installation of 9.00?

thanks,

[Carlospr]

Yes, I re-started it.

Yes, I had a profile, but I deleted.

I made another test with same results…

I have 7-zip installed, but I don’t think this is the problem…

I will make more tests and I’ll get back here to post…

Thank you.

[ivan]

The profile problem will be fixed in next release.

One more information. Compress to file.7z now uses Ultra compression + Solid, so to get same results via +Options feature you must turn on also Solid compression.

I will do some small change for next version, so Compress to file.7z uses Maximum + Solid instead of Ultra + Solid (since Ultra can cause memory problems).

[Carlospr]

After check “Solid” now it’s working fine.

I have tested (just one test!) Maximum+Solid and I got the same result as Ultra+Solid, however Maximum+Solid was faster.

Thanks.

[ivan]

Sure, ultra can be better only on very big sets of files (with solid option) or on very big files (without solid option). The difference is in dictionary size and when some dictionary size is enought for some files,then there is no difference in ratio. But maximum is always faster and uses less memory.

[manuangi]

@ivan:

I will do some small change for next version, so Compress to file.7z uses Maximum + Solid instead of Ultra + Solid (since Ultra can cause memory problems).

Please don’t!
I (and many others I guess) like it as it is…with the ultra option set by default!

[TBGBe]

Then again, on my W98 ancient laptop machine I can’t use Ultra (only 64M ram) :D

All the Explorer shell direct (compress to NN) options should really have dedicated configuration options.

[manuangi]

yea, but I guess nowadays all PCs have at least 256MB of RAM…and most of them run WinXP…it’s obvious that devs spend most of their efforts on those kind of system…(I’ve got 2GB of RAM :D )

anyway…What do you mean by “All the Explorer shell direct (compress to NN) options should really have dedicated configuration options”?
Can’t you create your own profile via Configuration -> CompressionProfiles?

[TBGBe]

Manuangi
I … like it as it is…with the ultra option set by default!
…
create your own profile via Configuration -> CompressionProfiles?

:rolleyes: Couldn’t you ? :rolleyes:

Seriously, thanks for the reminder.
Played with profiles for a few days then completely forgot about them :confused:

[spwolf]

@TBGBe:

Then again, on my W98 ancient laptop machine I can’t use Ultra (only 64M ram) :D

All the Explorer shell direct (compress to NN) options should really have dedicated configuration options.

problem with that would be inexperienced users changing it and then thinking its PA’s fault. We already have fair share of people asking us how come PA doesnt compress mp3’s or jpg’s…

thanks,

[TBGBe]

That’s OK - I can work with profiles (once the BZip2 query is sorted out).

P.S.

… how come PA doesnt compress … jpg’s …

Well, when I checked last, it does (a little bit) - depends on format :D

Graphic jpegs (digital camera) - 10 Files Total 12,600,516 bytes
-> cab 12,564,597
-> bh 12,588,570
-> zip 12,589,310
-> lzh 12,593,241

Whereas rar & ace both increased the total size (real Byte size, ignoring Disk usage).