Name paf is allready an archive name
-
Pow!!!
-
best one is .spa
super powerarchiver or special powerarchiver or spwolf powerarchiver
-
I would go with either .pa or .parc.
-
.torrent
.powerarchiver -
if you want to use just three letters then
.pow
meaning power
or
.pff
meaning powerarchiver file format
or
.fpa
meaning format powerachiver
-
.torrent
.power
.powerarchiver
.pa?
-
idea is to use
.paff or .pafa
powerarchiver file formart or powearchiver file archive
-
If i had to pick between those I would go with .PA
.Powerarchiver is just too long imo
Mame
-
I vote for the .pax suggestion made by Wandus.
-
sorry but .pax is in use
PaX is a patch for the Linux kernel
-
why not .spf
meaning spwolf powearxchiver format
-
sorry but .pax is in use
As is nearly everything else that has been suggested. So I don’t see that as a problem myself.
-
.torrent
.power
.pa:-)
-
sorry but .pax is in use
As is nearly everything else that has been suggested. So I don’t see that as a problem myself.
Right - many extensions are used by multiple bits of software.
- .doc - used by Word and WordPerfect
- .bin, .img - used for many different things
- .pdb - used for MSVC’s debugging symbols and Palm software packages
- .dwt - used for AutoCAD and DreamWeaver templates
The key is: will the conflict cause a lot of headaches? I think the only time the registered program for an extension is an issue is so the Explorer can figure out what program will be started when the file is double clicked.
I have a feeling that there won’t be too many PA users who are doing a whole lot with Linux kernel patch files.
-
maybe .guido ??
-
I will vote for guido :)
-
The key is: will the conflict cause a lot of headaches? I think the only time the registered program for an extension is an issue is so the Explorer can figure out what program will be started when the file is double clicked.
I have a feeling that there won’t be too many PA users who are doing a whole lot with Linux kernel patch files.
I actually agree, but it won’t hurt trying to avoid such a conflict. It’s not that important what the extension will be even if it would be nice if not too long. It’s more important to avoid headaches like you said, but if finding an extension that’s never been used that’s even better of course.
Unless the new format have much better compression ratio than 7z without being a lot slower i cannot really see the benefit of just another format. 7z is pretty common, the compression is great and extraction supported by most applications. So really no reason to use a new format unless it’s much better i think. For me it would also be important that other apps can extract these archives as well and not only PA.
I actually wonder….do we really need a new format? Should ConeXware spend their time on other tasks like fixing bugs faster, adding requested features and enhance the current features instead? Just a thought…
-gan
-
@gan:
I actually agree, but it won’t hurt trying to avoid such a conflict. It’s not that important what the extension will be even if it would be nice if not too long. It’s more important to avoid headaches like you said, but if finding an extension that’s never been used that’s even better of course.
Unless the new format have much better compression ratio than 7z without being a lot slower i cannot really see the benefit of just another format. 7z is pretty common, the compression is great and extraction supported by most applications. So really no reason to use a new format unless it’s much better i think. For me it would also be important that other apps can extract these archives as well and not only PA.
I actually wonder….do we really need a new format? Should ConeXware spend their time on other tasks like fixing bugs faster, adding requested features and enhance the current features instead? Just a thought…
-gan
if you have bugs, wishes, etc, there are forums for that and post away!
powerarchiver is compression utility… do you need compression format that can compress 30% better than anything else on the market, be truly multicore optimized and be first major format to finally use the power of multicore processors?
i think we do :-)
-
if you have bugs, wishes, etc, there are forums for that and post away!
I already did, but still waiting:) But that’s actually beside my point here.
powerarchiver is compression utility… do you need compression format that can compress 30% better than anything else on the market, be truly multicore optimized and be first major format to finally use the power of multicore processors?
i think we do :-)I agree and that’s what i said as well. It has to be pretty much better (compression, speed and so on) and hopefully in time supported by most other compression software. If not 7z, rar, tar-gzip and zip will work just fine.
If you promise 30% better compression ratio and still fast during compression/extraction then i look forward to the new format:)
-gan
-
@gan:
I already did, but still waiting:) But that’s actually beside my point here.
I agree and that’s what i said as well. It has to be pretty much better (compression, speed and so on) and hopefully in time supported by most other compression software. If not 7z, rar, tar-gzip and zip will work just fine.
If you promise 30% better compression ratio and still fast during compression/extraction then i look forward to the new format:)
-gan
keep in mind that we have separate engineers working on GUI and current formats, vs completely new format :-). So nothing in main PA, be it our zip support, gui, bug fixes, new ideas, are suffering because of new format.
thing with current formats is that most popular one was done 14 years ago…
… and none were done after multicore processors became popular… so without getting into technicalities, i think it is enough to say that there is no popular format out there that users multicore processors for extraction… not zip, zipx, rar, ace, 7zip, stuffit, tar, etc…
And it is impossible to do it without building format with that in mind, so those formats will never be able to do that.
