-
It would be nice to be able to at least extract Zstandard archives.
-
I prefer to use light themes, and when, for example, I have set up my main archive screen to be Classic Toolbar with Blizzard Blue, files in the archive are highlighted (no checkboxes, full row select) with white text on grey background. They are easy to see .
However, in the Add screens, the files and folders are black type upon a pale blue background, which is not so readily visible, especially when highlighting separate files in lists with Ctrl/Click for addition. It would be ideal if the backgrounds to files in these screens could be set to mimic the highlighting of those in the main archive window.
I have tried experimenting with different themes and settings for skins, toolbars and so forth, but, unless I’ve missed something, none seem to give me the effect I want.
-
Re: Windows 11 Context menu support
It would really make me happy if you put .BH in the Windows 11 context menu. I know it’s in the “More Options” section, but this would make it more convenient. Don’t know why the option to add it to the menu isn’t there in the first place. P-L-E-A-S-E ??? :) Thanks You!
-
Any chance of including this format in a future release?
https://github.com/FS-make-simple/paq9a
Exceptional compression levels.
Thanks.
-
Now that the Windows Store is making support for non-UWP apps mainstream, including those with their own update delivery process, it would be nice to see PowerArchiver in the Windows Store going forwards - at least as a channel for the product to be available.
-
Tell us what features you want from new format…
-
In Windows 11 a new explorer context menu is introduced.
The “old” context menu may still be accessed through an additional mouse click, to reach the PowerArchiver context menu functions, but this isn’t comfortable at all.Could you add PowerArchiver items to the first level (and ideally disable the Windows native ZIP entry)
-
I’m surprised that OneDrive for Business isn’t supported. I can’t link my company’s OneDrive account, but a personal (free) account works fine.
-
Hi,
I’d like to propose an improvement for password protected archives.
Actual behavior is:
If I open an archive, which is password protected and make a typo in the password dialog, I’ll get the message, that the password was wrong and I end up with an empty window. I need to reopen the archive to be able to enter the password again.Improved behavior:
Tell me, that the password was wrong and give me the chance to enter the correct password to decrypt the archive. -
Hello!
I know I have been asking for this feature some time ago, but as nothing has changed let me ask again:
The ZIPX-format offers an algorithm, that compresses JPEG-files by about 20-30%. Please add compression (packing) support for this in ZIPX-archives to Powerarchiver. Extraction of JPEGs packed into ZIPX by this algorithm is already supported by Powerarchiver for a long time, so it should not be difficult? Or is it a licensing problem?
Thanks! -
Hi,
I’d like to suggest, that the correct archive type is (always) selected, when adding files by drag & drop to an archive.
This is already happening if the archive has the correct extension. For example, if I’m adding files to test.zip, zip will be selected. If I’m adding files to test.7z, 7z will be selected as format in “Add dialog”.
But this won’t be working, if the archive has not the “right” extension.
So XPI files (Firefox addons) for example are ZIP files. PowerArchiver opens them without any problems, but if I try to add file by drag & drop, PowerArchiver won’t auto select “ZIP”, but use the last selected archive format, while PowerArchiver already knows, that I’m trying to add files to a ZIP. -
I love this, only there is one problem. The UAC elevation feature does not extend to Mount Image option in the add-on software PA provided. It is most annoying whenever I am on highest UAC settings and I mount an ISO, every time I open and create a virtual drive UAC appears. I also do not want to completely disable UAC.
Is adding UAC elevation for mount image feature possible?
-
The now defunct Bulkzip had Nanozip (nz) as an option this would be great to have for compatibility with my .nz files, so I don’t have to install Bulkzip separately.
SOLVED Lite/Free version and other plattforms
-
I am convinced that PowerArchiver is an excellent product, very complete in terms of features, cheap compared to the competitors, and with a superior native PA format.
Of course it needs to improve in terms of startup and close speed, but to make it widely used I guess we need:Lite/Free version
A less capable PA which can be used free for non-commercial use, without any nag. Some features could be removed such as SFX, or encrytion, but basic capabilities should be there. Users would be able to be used to it, and if they need more power, pay for the commercial versions. In the meantime due to its superior compression ratio, more and more files will be available compressed in PA format on the internet.Having more PA files, will come with more users using PowerArchive, some of them, which will pay for the full version.
OS/X and Linux support
Even if recent Delphi versions support OS/X and Linux targets, as a developer, I am aware that supporting those plattforms is not as easy as recompiling. Probably since the begining, there is lots of native Windows code in PA in order to optimize performace. Of course these code, should be isolated, to allow in a mid term, being able to have versions for OS/X and Linux, either Delphi or Lazarus built.As a short term solution PACL should be able to port to those plattforms, meaning that at least Mac and *NIX users will be able to manage PA archives using the command-line. Market share for OS/X is near 20%, while Linux Desktop is 2%, meaning that this measure will also come with new users.
If that is difficult, at least a PACL extractor only version, such as RAR is providing. If it is in source form, being able to be compiled with Lazarus, it could be backported to even more plattforms.
-
@nikkho there will be pacl for linux for sure, and we are seriously thinking about os x gui version… but that will take time and our current customers come first. Gui is not that complicated, it would simply have less features to start with but engines are a bit more complicated.
As to the free version, we usually have older versions of PA in magazines and as part of some deals on website. We can not have truly free/lite version of our site because we are commercial business that has to pay xxx amount of salaries each month. As a plus, this is a reason we can develop PowerArchiver with all these features, just like WinZip or WinRAR do :-).
With PA 2017, we have made it so it does not expire after initial period… so users will get a nag screen but can continue using PA, especially to extract archives.
Thanks!
-
@spwolf I actually would pay for a lean ‘core’ version focussed simply on maximum performance. Think a multithread Winzip 1.0. I generally don’t use the advanced features, sfx, encryption, etc… All I need is an ultrafast startup, compression and decompression. Even with a 90s interface I wouldn’t mind ;)
-
@alexmiller said in Lite/Free version and other plattforms:
@spwolf I actually would pay for a lean ‘core’ version focussed simply on maximum performance. Think a multithread Winzip 1.0. I generally don’t use the advanced features, sfx, encryption, etc… All I need is an ultrafast startup, compression and decompression. Even with a 90s interface I wouldn’t mind ;)
compression and decompression is as fast as it can be in PA 2017 already, it is really well optimized. Did you check .pa format?
For startup speed, lets use that other thread :-).
thanks!