I hope that despite my poor control of English, you can understand me.
When compressing a file, by default the extension is included as part of the file name. for example, if the file is name.pdf, the compressed file will be name_pdf.zip.
Is there any way for the extensions not to be included in the compressed file name? As much as I have searched I don’t see such an option.
Thanks for your time
I’m using Convert Archives on a local folder of .zip files, converting them to .lzh files, and I’m finding that perhaps 1 in 75 files is actually converting and outputting a file. Even then, the .lzh file is incomplete, missing most of the source files.
The progress bars completes OK, say 75/75 files, but only one .lzh file exists in the output folder.
It seems to be the same with different source and output folders on both local and USB disk - I can’t see a pattern.
The files extract and compress (to .lzh) without issue on their own.
Is there a log file I can check please, to see why PA does not like these files as part of the batch conversion?
Thanks very much, Rich.
I’m experiencing very slow extraction speed of multipart RAR files. For the first part the extraction is super fast but when PA reaches the part2.rar the extraction from there on gets super slow. PA needed for a 6,3 GB multipart archive 30 minutes to extract. I tested then with another program and it just took 70 seconds. I had this slow extraction speed with PA for quite a long time and I always thought that is maybe because of a high compression rate that the extraction would take longer. But it seems that only PA gets that slow.
I have lots of multipart archives that are 10+ GB and with PA it would be really time consuming. Is there any solution to this?
I have powerarchiver licenses for powerarchiver standard and toolbox (and also as a result for pro).
I can successfully register powerarchiver with my pro/toolbox codes, and it unlocks the majority of the content/features. However if I try and create a .pa style archive I get the registration popup saying I need PowerArchiver Pro (if I go to help/about I can verify I have the relevant version and it’s registered to me).
Powerarchiver 2021 20.00.73
Windows 10 Education 10.0.19042 Build 19042
When extracting gcc-arm-10.2-2020.11-mingw-w64-i686-arm-none-linux-gnueabihf.tar.xz , Powerarchiver wrongly thinks some .exe files have a length of zero:
Once extracted:D:\Temp\Powerarchiver\gcc-arm-10.2-2020.11-mingw-w64-i686-arm-none-linux-gnueabihf\bin>dir *.exe Volume in drive D is DATA Volume Serial Number is 0E12-BCA2 Directory of D:\Temp\Powerarchiver\gcc-arm-10.2-2020.11-mingw-w64-i686-arm-none-linux-gnueabihf\bin 2020-11-20 07:10 PM 1,391,599 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-addr2line.exe 2020-11-20 07:10 PM 0 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-ar.exe 2020-11-20 07:10 PM 0 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-as.exe 2020-11-20 07:41 PM 3,030,119 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-c++.exe 2020-11-20 07:10 PM 1,389,293 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-c++filt.exe 2020-11-20 07:41 PM 3,027,513 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-cpp.exe 2020-11-20 07:10 PM 4,040,503 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-dwp.exe 2020-11-20 07:10 PM 391,769 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-elfedit.exe 2020-11-20 07:41 PM 0 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-g++.exe 2020-11-20 07:41 PM 3,026,926 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-gcc-10.2.1.exe 2020-11-20 07:41 PM 609,607 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-gcc-ar.exe 2020-11-20 07:41 PM 609,607 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-gcc-nm.exe 2020-11-20 07:41 PM 609,607 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-gcc-ranlib.exe 2020-11-20 07:41 PM 0 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-gcc.exe 2020-11-20 07:41 PM 2,165,533 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-gcov-dump.exe 2020-11-20 07:41 PM 2,343,605 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-gcov-tool.exe 2020-11-20 07:41 PM 2,450,233 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-gcov.exe 2020-11-20 07:54 PM 9,605,899 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-gdb.exe 2020-11-20 07:41 PM 3,028,997 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-gfortran.exe 2020-11-20 07:10 PM 1,412,943 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-gprof.exe 2020-11-20 07:10 PM 0 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-ld.bfd.exe 2020-11-20 07:10 PM 0 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-ld.exe 2020-11-20 07:10 PM 0 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-ld.gold.exe 2020-11-20 07:41 PM 25,546,567 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-lto-dump.exe 2020-11-20 07:10 PM 0 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-nm.exe 2020-11-20 07:10 PM 0 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-objcopy.exe 2020-11-20 07:10 PM 0 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-objdump.exe 2020-11-20 07:10 PM 0 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-ranlib.exe 2020-11-20 07:10 PM 0 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-readelf.exe 2020-11-20 07:10 PM 1,393,083 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-size.exe 2020-11-20 07:10 PM 1,392,464 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-strings.exe 2020-11-20 07:10 PM 0 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-strip.exe 32 File(s) 67,465,867 bytes 0 Dir(s) 1,002,422,431,744 bytes free
When the same archive is being extracted from a git bash session (after having installed git 2.30.1 for Windows 64 bit version from git-scm.com), the .exe files are extracted as expected:xz -k -d gcc-arm-10.2-2020.11-mingw-w64-i686-arm-none-linux-gnueabihf.tar.xz tar xf gcc-arm-10.2-2020.11-mingw-w64-i686-arm-none-linux-gnueabihf.tar cd gcc-arm-10.2-2020.11-mingw-w64-i686-arm-none-linux-gnueabihf/bin ll *.exe -rwxr-xr-x 1 User 197121 1391599 Nov 20 19:10 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-addr2line.exe* -rwxr-xr-x 2 User 197121 1421598 Nov 20 19:10 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-ar.exe* -rwxr-xr-x 2 User 197121 2028927 Nov 20 19:10 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-as.exe* -rwxr-xr-x 2 User 197121 3030119 Nov 20 19:41 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-c++.exe* -rwxr-xr-x 1 User 197121 1389293 Nov 20 19:10 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-c++filt.exe* -rwxr-xr-x 1 User 197121 3027513 Nov 20 19:41 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-cpp.exe* -rwxr-xr-x 1 User 197121 4040503 Nov 20 19:10 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-dwp.exe* -rwxr-xr-x 1 User 197121 391769 Nov 20 19:10 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-elfedit.exe* -rwxr-xr-x 2 User 197121 3030119 Nov 20 19:41 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-g++.exe* -rwxr-xr-x 2 User 197121 3026926 Nov 20 19:41 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-gcc-10.2.1.exe* -rwxr-xr-x 1 User 197121 609607 Nov 20 19:41 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-gcc-ar.exe* -rwxr-xr-x 1 User 197121 609607 Nov 20 19:41 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-gcc-nm.exe* -rwxr-xr-x 1 User 197121 609607 Nov 20 19:41 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-gcc-ranlib.exe* -rwxr-xr-x 2 User 197121 3026926 Nov 20 19:41 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-gcc.exe* -rwxr-xr-x 1 User 197121 2165533 Nov 20 19:41 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-gcov-dump.exe* -rwxr-xr-x 1 User 197121 2343605 Nov 20 19:41 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-gcov-tool.exe* -rwxr-xr-x 1 User 197121 2450233 Nov 20 19:41 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-gcov.exe* -rwxr-xr-x 1 User 197121 9605899 Nov 20 19:54 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-gdb.exe* -rwxr-xr-x 1 User 197121 3028997 Nov 20 19:41 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-gfortran.exe* -rwxr-xr-x 1 User 197121 1412943 Nov 20 19:10 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-gprof.exe* -rwxr-xr-x 4 User 197121 2572182 Nov 20 19:10 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-ld.bfd.exe* -rwxr-xr-x 4 User 197121 2572182 Nov 20 19:10 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-ld.exe* -rwxr-xr-x 2 User 197121 4550029 Nov 20 19:10 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-ld.gold.exe* -rwxr-xr-x 1 User 197121 25546567 Nov 20 19:41 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-lto-dump.exe* -rwxr-xr-x 2 User 197121 1404945 Nov 20 19:10 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-nm.exe* -rwxr-xr-x 2 User 197121 1531656 Nov 20 19:10 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-objcopy.exe* -rwxr-xr-x 2 User 197121 1991350 Nov 20 19:10 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-objdump.exe* -rwxr-xr-x 2 User 197121 1421598 Nov 20 19:10 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-ranlib.exe* -rwxr-xr-x 2 User 197121 1163376 Nov 20 19:10 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-readelf.exe* -rwxr-xr-x 1 User 197121 1393083 Nov 20 19:10 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-size.exe* -rwxr-xr-x 1 User 197121 1392464 Nov 20 19:10 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-strings.exe* -rwxr-xr-x 2 User 197121 1531656 Nov 20 19:10 arm-none-linux-gnueabihf-strip.exe*
The same archive file does extract properly under a native Linux Ubuntu 20.04 system, or under Windows 10 using the WSL2 Linux subsystem using xz and tar.
I just saw, that on the Website, PowerArchiver 2021 20.00.73 is advertised as latest version. (Actually, the downloaded version says, it’s 20.00.70 in the about dialog)
But it still comes with the “red icon set” for preview versions and has some known unfixed bugs, as I read here.
Is it sufficiently stable to be used on production systems?
Hi I recently bought PowerArchiver and found some bugs and issues that I hit testing some of the features out.
If you are doing a backup and on the compression options screen its default is compression format is PA with no option to change disk spanning. If you change to 7-zip you can change disk spanning. If you change the disk spanning then move back to PA format the field for disk spanning disables but the option stays set to what you changed it to. When you do a backup it will use PA with files spanning but PowerArchiver says that its not a valid format when you open it. If PA can’t really do file spanning then this screen is allowing it.
I have attached an image where the progress bar is in the middle of the CD/DVD/BD Tools screen.
I have a 7-Zip file I created using the backup tools doing an increment backup. It opens and extracts just fine but if you using the Test option PowerArchiver locks up. Link to file: Backup-2021-02-05-20-35-36 TEST LOCKUP.7z
On any Zip/PA/7-Zip process the pause and cancel buttons do not work. You have to hard kill the entire application to get out.
There would be many of us with Intel Processors.
and they have their own optimized zlib algorithm, which can result in more efficiency if used combined with their hardware processor.
Can we get the same Functionality Under Hardware Acceleration Feature?
Zlib is not the only feature that intel has included with their processor, there’s many, which if combined can result in efficient and better compression ratios.
After the batch archiving is complete, and if I click on whitespace of the PA app, I get this error.
I did check for ongoing process and ensured no archives were corrupt, It seems like activity did complete successfully but the error is shown for no reason, and only after clicking the whitespace.
Please see if this can be removed.
I’m using the Kaspersky Total Security.
I have configured PA as exclusion as followed:
and also is set us trusted application
PA Trusted Application.png
My Antivirus likes to scan for everything, and it’s safeguarding behavior is to prevent the access to the file until the file is properly scanned for.
PA when losses the access to file, it is stuck, consumes Resources, and never completes the process or throws any error
PAStarter should also work as PAMonitor:
There should be a monitoring process, at least if I’m using queuing feature, that should check for never ending compression processes and terminate them so the queue can be little bit automated.
There should be multiple attempts at retrying if PA loses access to or is denied, instead of having to see process was stuck for longer duration.
Or, better, save the parameters I used for keeping the files in compression, and automatically restart the whole compression process after termination the same, of same folders and files set, this should happen in case if compression was stuck.
If you use Queue Feature, you are not saving on space, you are just squeezing less.
I did test the same on multiple files, and of different types.
It does have large difference for each large file you are trying to squeeze.
Folders with multiple files, just have no benefits if you use Queue Feature
I am using the portable version of PA2021. After switching from build 58 to 73 I have problems with the color-scheme:
While 58 behaves like expected and showed everything in light or dark colors according to the settings, 73 always shows the lower part of the window in dark colors, no matter whether I select automatic, light or dark.
This happens on a clean installation of 73 as well as on an update from build 58. I have attached two images generated on the same machine at the same time with the same settings. The upper shows build 73, the lower 58. Is it a bug or some changed setting I miss?
Thanks for help!
I currently own the PowerArchiver Select - lifetime free upgrades and support for PowerArchiver Toolbox English license.
This license is active on 1 device. Does the license allow me to activate PowerArchiver on a second device that I own? Or do I need a separate license for that?
Thank you ! :)
I’ve been dealing with an intermittent explorer.exe crash for 5-6 years now. It happens randomly and will usually occur multiple times within a single session of an hour or two on my machine when manipulating files through Windows Explorer. explorer.exe is the only thing that ever crashes, so it’s not hardware IMO. I’ve done all hardware diagnostics and RAM is good. I’ve even swapped out motherboards with different brand and even the exact same one and it still crashes. sfc /scannow indicates system files are fine. I’ve done multiple reinstalls of the OS with no positive results. This crashing has happened on Windows 7 64-bit and Windows 10 64-bit. It seemed to get more frequent with Windows 10 after upgrading last year. I’ve also been using PowerArchiver throughout that time period (upgrading over time with new releases). I recently disabled all non-Microsoft extensions via ShellExView and saw no crashes for about 10 days, which is really unusual. I turned back them all back on after 10 days and saw another explorer.exe crash within the hour. So I disabled all 32-bit extensions and saw another crash. Following that I disabled all the PowerArchiver shell extensions and haven’t seen a crash after a day of heavy usage manipulating files within Windows Explorer, which doesn’t happen for me. The crash dumps I’ve captured don’t seem to indicate PowerArchiver is involved but I have a hunch it has something do with PowerArchiver shell extensions. The system even feels smoother with the PA extensions disabled. Windows 10 reliability monitor always has the same type of problem:Description Faulting Application Path: C:\WINDOWS\explorer.exe Problem signature Problem Event Name: BEX64 Application Name: explorer.exe Application Version: 10.0.17134.165 Application Timestamp: 4031a9f8 Fault Module Name: StackHash_e78e Fault Module Version: 0.0.0.0 Fault Module Timestamp: 00000000 Exception Offset: PCH_8D_FROM_ntdll+0x000000000009AA54 Exception Code: c0000005 Exception Data: 0000000000000008 OS Version: 10.0.17126.96.36.199.256.48 Locale ID: 1033 Additional Information 1: e78e Additional Information 2: e78e327659b46c9a0c6916396b253cbf Additional Information 3: cebf Additional Information 4: cebf952c5db535ae7880488aafce55d9 Extra information about the problem Bucket ID: 1a57e4e784fbc735c231c68bd88581a9 (1311047270476906921)
I know this is a very nebulous explanation but is there any way to link this up to PA shell extensions as the cause? I can provide the crash dumps and additional information if necessary.
Do your own comparison
Can you add a test graph to compare your software to these competitors?
Yeah, but also to these . . .
Home => Windows Software => Utilities & Operating Systems =>File Compression
Sort by Editor’s rating, top 30, no PowerArchiver …?
Softpedia 5 stars rating in their review - Cnet Editor’s choice… For Top Ten reviews, we dont have affiliate program so we cant be featured there :-).
PowerArchiver is very well reviewed, by those sites that still review software and dont try to do affiliate promotion.
Otherwise, what is the point? Do you have to have someone else tell you how good PA is or what do you want next in it? (Wishlist Forums) :-).
As to the Toms Hardware, we use 7zip engine for 7zip, and our zip engine is about as fast as WinZip, and our unrar is little bit faster than WinRar’s. I think you know all of that already? Tom’s Hardware comparison is pretty amateurish though, so I dont know how do you want us to comment on it. Once we have our own format, then thats something else, but right now we have zip, 7zip, unrar, etc, and I think you know all of that?
Let me know what do you want us to comment on specifically :-)
Here is Softpedia’s PowerArchiver review with 5 stars:
Cnet’s gets lost with every new update we do and someone has to manually put the rating back on, it is pita. There were few other sites that reviewed PA in 2012, but mostly these days it is affiliate deal where they try to promote something and get money if you purchase the software.
basically when it comes to PA - zip is super fast, 7zip is super strong, they both have its advantages. Using rar has some other advantages as well. So all 3 formats make sense from user stand point, just depends on what you use.
Hopefully PA format will make most sense and in the meantime, PA has awesome support for zip, 7zip, rar, and 30 more formats, most of which will be further improved in next major release coming soon, but thats business as usual, as everyone frequenting our forums knows by now :-)
Personally, I think it makes sense to be compared/reviewed for a couple of reasons, like:
a. obviously it will show the strengths of PA
b. also for the users who -are- in fact already using PA
(a kind of getting a confirmation that still they made the ‘right choice’ at the time)
c. most people are checking out these kinds of reviews to see what is around/available, which programs are getting positive editor/user reviews, etc.
this often is the 1st step of trying out software, join the crowd (at least, that’s how I proceed)
but above all…
d. it may be benificial from a commercial point of view
(check the number of downloads on cnet, even if only a (very) small percentage results in buying a license)
As an end-user I donot know about this ‘affiliate program’-thing. I simply note that PA is missing and I feel a bit sorry for that because I think PA deserves to be among the other programs.
I won’t be mentioning any names here, but frankly I am using a few tools that are slowly vanishing from the scene. Similar to PA they hardly ever show up in such lists and/or are reviewed in magazines. One developer indicated that his product, though still maintained fixing possible bugs, will not develop any further: it would require further financial investments and the sales donot permit this. That tool, in my opinion one of the best I know after comparing over dozen during a couple of days, wasn’t showing up in any listing/review either…
Am subscribed to three computermagazines, but donot recall PA being reviewed over the last couple of years.
Anyway, I hope to have made my point :-)
p.s. pls donot get offended/irritated or whatever, it was a positively meant suggestion to get PA in such lists.
= btw - this is what is happening when writing a longer reply
Personally, I think it makes sense to be compared/reviewed for a couple of reasons, like:
review from toms hardware was reviewing different compression formats… so it makes no sense for PA to be reviewed there when it uses same engine as 7zip for 7zip, and it is about the same as WinZip with zip.
I dont think they care that our 7zip engine can pick different codecs, or that our unrar is 10% faster or that our zip can pick different engines and it has very good multithreaded performance. They are comparing formats basically, not different utilities. Plus they are doing bad job of it but thats something else.
If PA had its own unique format, then thats different. And I showed you PA getting reviewed, unfortunately software industry has a lot less media behind it these days than before, so there are a lot less magazines than before. We often give review copies for magazines, especially in Europe, so reviews show up… you can also buy PA on dvd’s in some countries. But in general, mags sell less, they review less… there are only few software sites that review software, rest are all some kind of affiliate schemes. Softpedia reviews software regularly for instance, rest of them far less.
as to some other software thats not getting enough sales, feel sorry for the guys… they probably moved on. We have plenty of customers and our sales are doing good. Last month was our best selling month in past 4 years.
Of course, if you like PA, please spread the word. We are far less known than WinZip or WinRar, but I believe we get a lot bigger percentege of people actually buying software than them because if you try PA, you will most likely love it :-). We also get a lot of business customers, large companies that purchase PowerArchiver for their complete organizations due to our security features (fips certification and such).
So spread the word, get involved in wishlist forums, and tell us what you think of our own format once we release it this year :-).
and recommend PA to your company as well… thats where a lot of our business comes from. PA is only compression utility that has phone support, as well as email and web chat. We are also only one of above with security certificates that allows for US Govt to buy our software - with fips 140-2 aes certification. WinZip, WinRar or 7zip can not be used by US Govt institutions due to data protection laws.