• Categories
    • Recent
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Search
    • Register
    • Login
    MSI release?
    J

    I’m looking forward to deploying PowerArchiver 2023 to my users. Can you tell us when the MSI will be available for download and distribution?

    Thanks.

    Tech Support
    Missing Icons
    LuxorL

    Just tried using the Modern (Windows 10) Icon set and seeing a few missing icons in both PowerArchiver Burner and PowerArchiver Encryption screens . They are all there in the Minimalistik icon set and the only difference I can see is the former is blue and the latter grey. In version 22.00.9

    powerarc_2023-09-18_17-00-19.png

    powerarc_2023-09-18_17-01-05.png

    Tech Support
    Security vulnerabilities in 7zip / Update for PowerArchiver and PACL libraries?
    BigMikeB

    Hi there,

    there were some security issues fixed in 7zip:
    https://www.zerodayinitiative.com/advisories/ZDI-23-1165/
    https://www.zerodayinitiative.com/advisories/ZDI-23-1164/

    As it seems, that PowerArchiver and PACL use the 7zip libraries, could you please update them to the latest version?

    Tech Support
    Virtual Drive
    E

    Hi,

    From where I get PAVD2023.EXE? PowerArchiver 2023 tries to open it.
    But it seems, it tries to download PAVD2021.EXE.

    Thanks

    Tech Support
    Better ZPAQ support
    W

    I noticed that the version of ZPAQ used is older than the latest released 7.15 https://mattmahoney.net/dc/zpaq.html also there seems to be a newer fork that adds several features https://github.com/fcorbelli/zpaqfranz

    It would be useful to implement this latest version (it also maintains the same syntax and behavior as the latest official release if used the -715 flag) and add when opening a zpaq file a choice of the version of the files to show (e.g. as dummy folders represented the various versions present). Since any previous changes are stored with this format, it is possible to extract a snapshot of a certain date/version.

    Tech Support
    Bug with "Encrypt Archive" action
    W

    If I open a password-protected zipper file (created with WinRAR but I think that’s irrelevant), open it with PowerArchiver and run “Remove Encryption” on the same file, then reopen it and add a password with “Encrypt Archive,” the resulting archive will be protected with the old ZipCrypto algorithm and not AES as indicated.
    (this can be verified, for example, by trying to open the archive files with Windows Explorer, which does not support the AES algorithm)

    Tech Support
    PA 21.00.18 Action / Test behaves oddly for me on .PA files
    Brian GregoryB

    PA 21.00.18 running on Windows 7 64 bit.
    I made a big .PA file and thought I’d check it was made correctly with Menu / Actions / Test.
    Discovered:
    a) PA always issues a UAC prompt to do this!
    b) PA always says there are many errors in PA files.

    Tech Support

    PA compatible with Vista x64?

    Tech Support
    6
    23
    19186
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • D
      denzilla
      last edited by

      Just checking before I take the plunge :)

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • S
        Serhiy
        last edited by

        yes, PowerArchiver supports Windows Vista x64 including 64 bit shell extensions.

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • RJWaringR
          RJWaring
          last edited by

          Fully compatible! but you don’t need to take our word for it you can try the product for free 1st then take the financial plunge if you are happy with it ;)

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • spwolfS
            spwolf conexware
            last edited by

            I am not so sure about SP1…

            S 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • S
              Serhiy @spwolf
              last edited by

              @spwolf:

              I am not so sure about SP1…

              Ok, Vista SP 1 has not been released yet (RTM is avaiable to MSDN Subsribers only)… We have some time to test it ;)

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • spwolfS
                spwolf conexware
                last edited by

                for less headaches overall, i do reccomend 32bit edition… many hardrive companies still dont have drivers for 64bit OS’s.

                S 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • S
                  Serhiy @spwolf
                  last edited by

                  @spwolf:

                  for less headaches overall, i do reccomend 32bit edition… many hardrive companies still dont have drivers for 64bit OS’s.

                  but if you have more then 3 gb RAM installed, using 64 bit OS is the only way to use it. If your CPU supports x64 features, why not to use them? Also why not to use extra security features avaiable only in Vista x64 (Patch Guard, signed-only driver installation…)?

                  spwolfS 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • D
                    denzilla
                    last edited by

                    I purchased a PA lic long ago. Just wanted to make sure it was going to work with Vista 64-bit before I bothered to install it. BTW, I have access to a slipstream ISO of SP1 so it will be SP1 thats installed.

                    spwolfS 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • spwolfS
                      spwolf conexware @denzilla
                      last edited by

                      @denzilla:

                      I purchased a PA lic long ago. Just wanted to make sure it was going to work with Vista 64-bit before I bothered to install it. BTW, I have access to a slipstream ISO of SP1 so it will be SP1 thats installed.

                      as I said, dont do it, yet :-).

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • spwolfS
                        spwolf conexware @Serhiy
                        last edited by

                        @NTFS:

                        but if you have more then 3 gb RAM installed, using 64 bit OS is the only way to use it. If your CPU supports x64 features, why not to use them? Also why not to use extra security features avaiable only in Vista x64 (Patch Guard, signed-only driver installation…)?

                        i understand that… but many hardware components will not work with 64bit Vista because of the nature of cut-throat hardware business. Most companies, even large ones, simply take designs from Taiwanese companies who then dont ever bother with releasing 64bit drivers.

                        D 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • D
                          denzilla @spwolf
                          last edited by

                          Not sure if I can resist. All my hardware is supported with x64 drivers and I don’t use any of the programs on MS’s list of problem applications :D

                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • NarutoN
                            Naruto
                            last edited by

                            PA stil compatible with Vista Sp 1 for x86 & x64. I’ve tested it. Got the Vista SP 1 from μsoft OEM Partner site.

                            D 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • D
                              denzilla @Naruto
                              last edited by

                              Just finished installing everything tonight and PA seems too be fine. Running a slipstreamed ISO (direct from MS) of Vista Business SP1 64-bit. Was a bit suprised that it installed into the x86 program files Dir though.

                              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • C
                                crunch
                                last edited by

                                It’ll do that for programs that aren’t native 64-bit for backwards compatibility. I have found one problem on Vista Ultimate x64 SP1: shell extensions don’t show up when right-clicking associated files in Total Commander. They do when right-clicking associated files in Windows Explorer though.

                                spwolfS 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                • spwolfS
                                  spwolf conexware @crunch
                                  last edited by

                                  @crunch:

                                  It’ll do that for programs that aren’t native 64-bit for backwards compatibility. I have found one problem on Vista Ultimate x64 SP1: shell extensions don’t show up when right-clicking associated files in Total Commander. They do when right-clicking associated files in Windows Explorer though.

                                  thats because shell extensions are actually 64bit… probably why it doesnt work in TC.

                                  C 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                  • C
                                    crunch
                                    last edited by

                                    Ok, so I would need to be using a 64-bit version of TC for the shell extensions to show up there is what you’re saying right…

                                    spwolfS 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                    • spwolfS
                                      spwolf conexware @crunch
                                      last edited by

                                      @crunch:

                                      Ok, so I would need to be using a 64-bit version of TC for the shell extensions to show up there is what you’re saying right…

                                      i would guess so - you need to ask at TC forums/support.

                                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                      • C
                                        crunch @spwolf
                                        last edited by

                                        @spwolf:

                                        thats because shell extensions are actually 64bit… probably why it doesnt work in TC.

                                        spwolf, did you mean PA’s shell extensions are 64bit, or just shell extensions in general when running on 64bit OS?

                                        Is PA 32bit or 64bit?

                                        Since TC is 32bit, I need to install 32bit version of PA for its shell extensions to show up in TC. Is it possible to install 32bit PA on a 64bit Vista, or is the installer detecting 64bit OS and installing a 64bit version of PA?

                                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                        • C
                                          crunch
                                          last edited by

                                          It seems that on 64bit Windows, 32bit applications can install 32bit or 64bit shell extensions (or both). These shell extensions are then accessible by programs running within the same architecture as the shell extension.

                                          It seems that on 64bit Vista, PA installs 64bit shell extensions. Can you have it install the 32bit shell extensions as well?

                                          spwolfS 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                          • spwolfS
                                            spwolf conexware @crunch
                                            last edited by

                                            @crunch:

                                            It seems that on 64bit Windows, 32bit applications can install 32bit or 64bit shell extensions (or both). These shell extensions are then accessible by programs running within the same architecture as the shell extension.

                                            It seems that on 64bit Vista, PA installs 64bit shell extensions. Can you have it install the 32bit shell extensions as well?

                                            I am pretty sure that you can only have 64bit shell extensions, since they are loaded by system itself and not by PowerArchiver.

                                            If you installed 32bit extensions, they would not work in Windows. Otherwise we would not go through all the trouble of writing 64bit extensions.

                                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                            • C
                                              crunch
                                              last edited by

                                              The work accomplished in writing the 64bit extensions is not wasted, it helped to add compatibility for 64bit programs on 64bit Windows. Windows Explorer falls under this category (although apparently there is a 32bit as well as a 64bit version of that program on 64bit Windows that run from different directories). However, there are also 32bit programs running on 64bit Windows and compatibility for those programs is currently broken. Here we’re talking about most of the Windows Explorer shell replacements.

                                              Please read the part about Avast antivirus installing 32bit and 64bit extensions here http://ghisler.ch/board/viewtopic.php?t=14948&highlight=64bit+shell+extension+windows

                                              …and then read the part about WinRAR’s steps towards full compatibility here http://ghisler.ch/board/viewtopic.php?t=9153&highlight=64bit+shell+extension+windows

                                              Note that the WinRAR thread was made in 2005, WinRAR has fixed this problem at this point (not making a comparison, just showing that it is possible to have full compatibility with 32bit/64bit apps on 64bit Windows).

                                              Thanks for your time.

                                              spwolfS 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                              • spwolfS
                                                spwolf conexware @crunch
                                                last edited by

                                                I know… i would have preffered for explorer shell replacements to do it properly, instead of us doing the work, for them.

                                                can you please create an wishlist for that in wishlist forums? thanks a lot.

                                                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                                • C
                                                  crunch
                                                  last edited by

                                                  Done. Thank you so much…

                                                  http://www.powerarchiver.com/forums/showthread.php?p=13927#post13927

                                                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                                  • First post
                                                    Last post