Can you include .3MF to the list of re-compressible formats?

[drteeth]

@davidpslash - So don’t use it!

Driving is dangerous. The most safest way is to walk everywhere.

DrT

[Serhiy]

I lost my brakes while driving today because of a damaged brake cylinder :eek:

[drteeth]

Told you walking is safer!

[TBGBe]

@drteeth:

Told you walking is safer!

Not if NTFS is driving :p

[spwolf]

@drteeth:

@davidpslash - So don’t use it!

Driving is dangerous. The most safest way is to walk everywhere.

DrT

so you walk around and Serhiy hits you with his car and no brakes ;-)

[drteeth]

This post is deleted!

[drteeth]

@spwolf:

so you walk around and Serhiy hits you with his car and no brakes ;-)

That’s called ‘fate’ :eek:.

DrT

[wulffra]

I am a simple ‘enduser’ without knowledge of .rars and .pars and the complexity behind it.

This being said,I think deleting archives is welcomed specifically when extracting rar-sets, with 10, 20 or more .rars.

In most cases they come with pars as well.

My experience with PA (I can’t judge other archive utilities) is that if something is ‘wrong’ with a .rar-file, like being incomplete, missing, PA warns about this and users can stop the processa and take actions to correct this.

But once PA runs through the entire set without warnings and everything is extracted, then I wonder what would be against deleting the .rars (and .pars)…

Or, in other words, what would be the use of keeping all the rars/pars ?

Last but not least, deleting that stuff still is an option not PA’s default behaviour. If, for whatever reasons, users wish to keep these files then they should tag this option.

[Micke]

@wulffra:

Last but not least, deleting that stuff still is an option not PA’s default behaviour. If, for whatever reasons, users wish to keep these files then they should tag this option.

Maybe I’m one of the few people in this thread that think this is a very bad idea to implement in PA. I see no reason at all to even have the option of deleting archives after successful extraction. It’s much safer and better if the user have to do this either manually after extraction or creating a script that can do this.

Personally I don’t even want the possibility of deleting a archive automatic after successful extraction from PA, because extracting data from a archive is a read operation of the archive and I then expect the source to be intact after extraction.

Even if this will be an option in PA that’s turned off by default, it will increase the risk of that the user might loose data either by mistake or if something goes wrong.

Kind Regards
Micke

[RJWaring]

Seems that the Needs of the Many out weigh the needs of the few…

If users are worried about this feature it will be defaulted to not delete on completion. PA Could even ask on extract “Do you wish to delete archive?” on each extract if needed.

There are many ways to make this safe and clear for users and if Admin dont want it they have the ability to Fix it so users cant change it within the registry.

[DKJones]

Perhaps I misunderstand Sir Richard’s post . . . but I agree with Micke.

I think the needs of the many are to not have this feature. Perhaps the needs of a few super users is to have this feature. However, I assume that is not your basic clientele.

More than once I have gone to one of the config screens and found a box checked that I did not remember checking. It was likely just sloppiness on my part, but if so, I suspect I am sloppy in just the way others are.

If I lost a valuable file because of this, I would not be happy.

Clearly some subset of people will want this. However, I cannot imagine that most ordinary users will.

In any event, here’s an idea.

Do NOT put this as an option; but explain to those who DO want this option how to edit the registry to have this option.

If someone then edits their registry to automatically delete a file, only to find they don’t want the file deleted . . . then they knew the risk when they delved into their registry.

Just a thought.

[TBGBe]

I also don’t have a use for automatic delete - but cannot really justify arguing against an option for it.

I keep thinking on all the “lost password” type requests/complaints with encrypted archives.

I wonder if a blatant warning such as
“Enable this option and there will be no help given to retrieve files that have been deleted - so don’t even ask!”.

May not be true but still …

[spwolf]

people should pass IQ test before encrypting archives ;-). We had some poor folks crying about losing their password on important stuff that should never have been encrypted in the first place.

;-).

Anyway, my point is that warning windows do not matter, people click on Yes before they even see it, heh…

[wulffra]

@DKJones:

If I lost a valuable file because of this, I would not be happy.

Likewise you may also feel unhappy when deleting a file manually, after extract.

But again, this all is an option

Users can tag to

Autodelete files after processing

Use Recycle Bin

If they want to delete the files manually, fine.

Then nothing to be tagged.

All upto the user… ;)

[simonarch]

Yeah this is the same process i follow… Good to read through all the user comments on potential issues.

[wulffra]

spwolf, ref your request to update the existing threads
see: http://www.powerarchiver.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4419&page=2

i’d like to bring this up again - wondering whether this is being considered or whether there are too many ‘oponents’ so the idea likely will have no success…?

thanks

[drteeth]

@spwolf:

people should pass IQ test before encrypting archives ;-). We had some poor folks crying about losing their password on important stuff that should never have been encrypted in the first place.

;-).

Anyway, my point is that warning windows do not matter, people click on Yes before they even see it, heh…

www.darwinawards.com

DrT

[alextorex]

Hi,
I was looking for a 7zip front-end alternative.
I am quite dissapointed by PowerArchiver.
The name “PowerArchiver” implies that it’s powerful and useful for power users.
And indeed has plenty of features but…
some basic feature of deleting archives after extract which is implemented even in free software is unavailable.
Also 7zip functionality is crippled:

• can’t lower priority of archiving process (for 7zip)
• can’t choose number of threads
• cant specify spanning volume size in bytes
• LZMA2 unavailable
• 64bit not avaliable
  PeaZip has these features.

Only thing that attracts me to PowerArchiver is the queue.

[RJWaring]

@alextorex:

The name “PowerArchiver” implies that it’s powerful and useful for power users.

If you have followed PowerArchiver from the very start of its Development it has come from a small Free Zip program to what it is now. You will gain an understanding that it is now more than ever expanding its features for normal and “Power” users.

You can also read the meaning of “Power” as a Noun - capability of doing or accomplishing something. And that is does do! But no Person or Program can do Everything!

However, the development team read through Hundreds of emails and forum requests every day! And the Alpha Team test new deveopments and changes regulary to see if it works well and benifits the users on release.

So maybe in the near future PowerArchiver will have the capability of doing something you as a user will benifit from.

And the speed we make updates and release new versions of PA as a program is quite frankly Amazing! So I am sure these areas around 7zip will be in PowerArchiver before to long.

[alextorex]

Consider the following scenario:
I have limited space on HDD and I must archive lots of folders to make space.
I start archiving each folder using queue. The problem is that folders are not deleted and soon I ran out of hdd space.

So the queue functionality is rendered useless and I must archive each folder one by one and do manual delete for hundreds of folders.