U3 yes, but non-U3 portable?

[rmoody]

I really love PowerArchiver, just purchased it. I have been getting into portable apps and I noticed the U3 version. What about a non-U3 version for USB drives akin to Portable Firfox and the other apps at PortableApps.com. I would really like that as I don’t have a U3 drive. Thanks!

[spwolf]

@rmoody:

I really love PowerArchiver, just purchased it. I have been getting into portable apps and I noticed the U3 version. What about a non-U3 version for USB drives akin to Portable Firfox and the other apps at PortableApps.com. I would really like that as I don’t have a U3 drive. Thanks!

reason we started with U3, is that they sent us info and drives first. I know there are some other companies creating host apps for USB drives, and we might add support for them later.

Right now we are working on 10.00 and we definetly wont dedicate any time to anything else until we are finished.

Another problem is that every new version requires us to update it as soon as we update PowerArchiver, and right now we have 40 different installations of PowerArchiver to update :-).

[mwb1100]

To have PowerArchiver run in portable mode does not require any special drives.

Essentially, portable applications are those that can run without a special installation - no configuration information is stored in the registry - files contain the configuration, and the files are found by searching in reasonable locations until found (something like first look in the USERDATA directory, then look in the directory where the .exe is loaded from).

If PA requires COM components to run, they must be specified in manifest files so that the system can locate them without having them registered in the registry. MSDN has information on how to do this.

Obviously, PA will not be able to be integrated into the explorer shell when run in this mode, but it would still be a useful option.

[spwolf]

@mwb1100:

To have PowerArchiver run in portable mode does not require any special drives.

Essentially, portable applications are those that can run without a special installation - no configuration information is stored in the registry - files contain the configuration, and the files are found by searching in reasonable locations until found (something like first look in the USERDATA directory, then look in the directory where the .exe is loaded from).

If PA requires COM components to run, they must be specified in manifest files so that the system can locate them without having them registered in the registry. MSDN has information on how to do this.

Obviously, PA will not be able to be integrated into the explorer shell when run in this mode, but it would still be a useful option.

the whole problem is that you wont be able to properly register shell extensions or associations, which is what most of the people use.

But, there is portable host software for U3, which is drive independent, and should do pretty much what U3 does - clean everything before and after portable app is launched.

But of course, end user still has to pay extra for it, so it ends up a lot cheaper to buy U3 drive…

[quatermass]

U3 is a pain.
You can’t add your own apps, only special ones provided by U3 or associated party.

As a IT techie, I bought a 2GB U3 stick recently and after trying U3 I had to remove its ‘U3’ ability. It’s too limiting.

There was no way for me to simply add a script or 3rd party app of my choosing.

I now just use Pstart.exe to setup my apps in a nice panel.

U3 is doomed imho if it doesn’t document to non-commercial users like myself how to add a program of my to it.

So I’d like to see a PortableApps version thank you very much. 7zp do a zip portableApps version….

[Ice]

I’d like to bring up that topic again:
What are the current plans for a portable version?

Today we got the new version, but I won’t even consider spending money for the upgrade unless ther is a portable version! For that however I would gladly pay even the full price again!

Wouldn’t it have been a better choice to spend some time developing a portable version instead of integrating new features that other programs can do better anyway?

[spwolf]

@Ice:

I’d like to bring up that topic again:
What are the current plans for a portable version?

Today we got the new version, but I won’t even consider spending money for the upgrade unless ther is a portable version! For that however I would gladly pay even the full price again!

Wouldn’t it have been a better choice to spend some time developing a portable version instead of integrating new features that other programs can do better anyway?

what portable version? Any or U3? U3 is coming again, as many of our users use it (many of USB drives currently sold are U3 compatible)…

[spwolf]

p.s. any portable version would be free of charge to current PA users, you certainly wouldnt have to pay extra for it…

[Ice]

Well, first thanks for your answer!!!

“portable” just means a program that you don’t have to install and that consists of just one file (as described in the first post)!

And I know I wouldn’t have to pay extra for a portable version, I just wanted to say that I was willing to because such a version is really important to me!

Just hink about it:
What do you usually use archives for?
You use them to transport data!
And to unpack those files you need some application on every computer you want to use that data on, so a portable version REALLY makes sense!
How could you not offer such a version?!?

I REALLY like PowerArchiver, but I have to use 7zip-portable on other computers, so that naturally makes me think about only using the latter…

[spwolf]

@Ice:

Well, first thanks for your answer!!!

“portable” just means a program that you don’t have to install and that consists of just one file (as described in the first post)!

And I know I wouldn’t have to pay extra for a portable version, I just wanted to say that I was willing to because such a version is really important to me!

Just hink about it:
What do you usually use archives for?
You use them to transport data!
And to unpack those files you need some application on every computer you want to use that data on, so a portable version REALLY makes sense!
How could you not offer such a version?!?

I REALLY like PowerArchiver, but I have to use 7zip-portable on other computers, so that naturally makes me think about only using the latter…

i understand what you want… thats why wishlist forum is for. We will check it out for one of the future versions, we will still support U3 as thats what many people request through support pages.

thanks,

[TSchm]

I also wish there will be a portable version.

But I would prefer if you don’t do it as an U3 version, because this will limit the use to only some USB devices. If you would create one package like they do at portableapps.com you could use it with every device.

[spwolf]

we will see what happens, you guys will be getting at least one of these versions… and maybe both (eventuall)…

[davidsplash]

i have already used powerarchiver on a usb stick without it being u3 the only part i have and the only thing it does not give me is shell extensions but that doesn’t matter. just install to usb and register as normaly and it should work ok on a usb with out shell extensions

[george_lol]

Please make a version for PortableApps. U3 is insufficient.

[Ice]

Now, since the new version 11 has been released and since U3 is more or less obsolete:

Is there a portable version of PowerArchiver?!?!

[spwolf]

not right now, but we will make one i guess