Navigation

    • Register
    • Login
    • Search
    • Categories
    • Recent
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Search
    • Missing virtual driver in Patchbeam

      pirrbe

      PA 2023 22.00.08
      Long time no seeing. So I start up the new year with a first problem : the virtual driver cannot be installed. Reason : it is missing in the Fast Ring PatchBeam Update Service…
      Virtual driver PA 2023-01-28 152607.png
      It seems a standard problem with new releases :-)
      Can I have a link or can it be fixed. Thank you. CU later

      Tech Support
    • PA 21.00.18 testing via context menu causes extraction of files

      D

      When the function for testing archives is invoked via the shell context menu (PowerArchiver > Test) then all the files in the archive get extracted to the current folder.

      The test dialog reports as many errors as there are files in the archive but it fails to give any hint as to which files are supposed to be erroneous or what the nature of the problem might be. Comparing the extracted files to the originals shows no differences at all.

      The .7z in question was produced with maximised compression settings in 7zip (taking forever but resulting in smaller archives than .7z produced by PowerArchiver with maximised settings). Therefore I wanted to see whether PowerArchiver can at least test .7z that it produced itself. Hence I had PowerArchiver convert a .pa with the same contents to .7z. There weren’t any errors reported but the resulting .7z contained fewer than half of the files contained in the .pa (137 of 366), so I scratched that test.

      Performance is abysmal when testing via the context menu (e.g. almost 2 minutes for testing a .7z that 7zip tests in 4 seconds), but that is most likely due to the fact that the extracted files are written to disk. Testing the same .7z in the PowerArchiver GUI takes only 8 seconds but causes the mysterious appearance of a UAC dialog, as reported elsewhere.

      The testing function is vital because PowerArchiver has a history of producing archives that it cannot unpack without errors or that do not conform to the respective file format standards (e.g. ZIP) so that other programs report them as erroneous.

      The point of creating archives is that the files in them will most likely have to be extracted at some point. If the extraction cannot be guaranteed to produce correct results then the whole program is absolutely pointless. Actually, worse than pointless - it causes data loss and hence damage.

      Tech Support
    • Start PowerArchiver 2023 Starter when my computer starts

      Brian Gregory

      In PowerArchiver 2023 22.00.06 configuration, the option labelled “Start PowerArchiver 2023 Starter when my computer starts” seems to be redundant.

      I am only allowed to change this option when PA Starter is disabled, and then it seems to be ignored.

      When I enable PA Starter this option is forced to the enabled state.

      I think it’d be good to remove “Start PowerArchiver 2023 Starter when my computer starts” completely. I’ve always found it confusing having both options.

      Added later: However i don’t particularly want to use queue but I do like having the PAStarter icon in my tray area.

      Tech Support
    • Testing .pa archives

      PA_Fan

      W10 Pro 22H2 - 64 -bit

      PA 22.00.06 (PA 2023)

      It has been the case with previous versions of PowerArchiver, but I had hoped that the latest might behave differently. Not so, I’m afraid.

      I have, for various obscure reasons, created a few .pa archives, mainly in the hope that they will save me some more space. From time to time, I use the “Test” option to check that important archives are OK and uncorrupted.

      With every .pa archive I’ve tested, the process runs through OK but then reports that there are errors. This is always the number of files in the archive e.g. if 11 files, then 11 errors reported.

      In the .pa, I can:-

      preview the files (usually PDF) extract some or all files and look at or use them convert the .pa to a .zip or .zipx archive, which then works fine and tests without errors

      Is it the case that the Test routine isn’t designed for .pa archives, or is there another reason? Although the .pa seems to function properly, despite the test reporting errors, I would like to be sure that every .pa is OK and not “broken”.

      Some of the .pas are quite old and produced with earlier PA versions (they are truly “archives”). If I extract all the files in the old .pa, create a new, fresh .pa and add back the files to that, then test the new, no errors (at least in the .pa I’ve tried this on) are reported. This would suggest a mismatch between old .pas and newer versions of PA itself.

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

      Brian Gregory

      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
    • Small UI / Theme bug in 2023

      Z

      Clipboard02.jpg

      See the, supposedly, blank space where the green box is? It’s like that in Modern Light theme too. I can toggle it, but it’s missing text or shouldn’t be there I guess?

      Thanks :)

      Tech Support
    • PowerArchiver and PACL for macOS

      spwolf

      Dear @Alpha-Testers and all of our users,

      time has come for testing of PowerArchiver and PACL for macOS.
      Please let us know here if you have Mac and can test latest builds.

      Features implemented:
      PowerArchiver 2020 - tabbing, opening, extracting, adding, testing, favorite folders, support for multiple languages, opening via Finder, explorer mode, installer.
      PACL 10 - support for most formats and features in Windows version.

      Upcoming: Tools such as archive converter, batch zip, multi-extract.

      To start testing, please sign up here in this thread, and we will send you latest build.

      thank you!

      Ashampoo_Snap_Wednesday, November 20, 2019_12h54m56s_008_.png Ashampoo_Snap_Wednesday, November 20, 2019_12h55m05s_009_.png Ashampoo_Snap_Wednesday, November 20, 2019_12h55m14s_010_.png Ashampoo_Snap_Wednesday, November 20, 2019_12h55m30s_011_.png Ashampoo_Snap_Wednesday, November 20, 2019_12h55m39s_012_.png Ashampoo_Snap_Wednesday, November 20, 2019_12h55m49s_013_.png Ashampoo_Snap_Wednesday, November 20, 2019_12h56m00s_014_.png Ashampoo_Snap_Wednesday, November 20, 2019_12h54m43s_007_.png

      76e97ab9-8d75-4175-9ce8-446500031f38-image.png

      Tech Support
    • Functions in Windows 11 context menu no longer work after last Windows Update

      T

      For some reason, the PowerArchiver functions in the Windows 11 context menu no longer work after the last Windows Update. Only the functions in the classic context menu function as they should.

      I’ve tried uninstalling PowerArchiver and using RevoUninstaller to remove all bits and pieces that were left behind and did a clean install of PowerArchiver, it didn’t fix the issue. Other items in the Windows 11 context menu work.

      Tech Support

    Handling of folders in archives / slow

    Tech Support
    5
    10
    11842
    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.
    • O
      olivers last edited by

      Hi, I’m currently evaluating PowerArchiver and I like it. One thing I noticed, though, is that the handling of folders in archives doesn’t seem too great. The first thing that meets the eye is that PA is reloading the current folder contents all the time. Browsing through multi-folder hierarchies takes a lot of patience and PA even reloads folders even if I enter and leave the options dialog.

      Maybe that handling wouldn’t be so bad if reloading the folders wasn’t so horribly slow… during the course of my evaluation I have seen a lot of other archivers and none of them has been slow… I’ve been testing with the same zip archive: about 5MB, a few thousand source code files in a few hundred folders. All the other tools have shown bugs that PA doesn’t seem to have, so that’s a good thing, but in all the other tools browsing of the contents of single folders was instant, while in PA it takes around five seconds to open the archive in the first place and then it takes above a second (I’m guessing here) every time I click a folder in the hierarchy or a reload takes place for other reasons.

      I admit this is quite an important issue for me, so is there anything I can do about it? Please tell me if you need any additional information. Is this the official support channel at all? I like the opportunity to test PA support as well before buying, so I’m looking forward to your reply!

      Thanks
      Oliver

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • ivan
        ivan conexware last edited by

        This will be improved in upcoming 9.5:)

        O 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • O
          olivers @ivan last edited by

          @ivan:

          This will be improved in upcoming 9.5:)

          Sounds good. Looking at your archived news though, I see that 9.2 has only been available for a month or so, and between 9.1 and 9.2 it’s been four months. So when will 9.5 be available? Specifically, will it be available before my evaluation period expires?

          Thanks
          Oliver

          O TBGBe 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • O
            olivers @olivers last edited by

            No more replies now?

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • TBGBe
              TBGBe @olivers last edited by

              @olivers:

              Is this the official support channel at all?

              I suppose the “official support” on an individual basis is via http://www.powerarchiver.com/support/

              The forums are mainly User to User help and support - with ivan and spwolf (the official representatives of Conexware) joining in. Although bug reports in this Tech Support forum are “semi-official” in so far as they do get fixed.

              @olivers:

              … Specifically, will it be available before my evaluation period expires?

              Well, you didn’t say how long your evaluation period is. :rolleyes:
              As version 9.5 is still being developed and it’s not yet in ALPHA testing stage … I would guess the answer would have to be no. :(

              O 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • O
                olivers @TBGBe last edited by

                @TBGBe:

                Well, you didn’t say how long your evaluation period is. :rolleyes:
                As version 9.5 is still being developed and it’s not yet in ALPHA testing stage … I would guess the answer would have to be no. :(

                I didn’t assume there would be more than one possible length for the evaluation period… from the dialog appearing on startup, it looks like it’s 30 days.

                Thanks for the info about v9.5. I’ll have to think about it under these circumstances, as the issue I was reporting is really quite serious for zip files with a lot of files and folders, and while competing products have problems in other areas they work just fine with those zip files. I’m also getting the impression that for a version 9.5 (I don’t think there’s any other packer program out there with a larger number, apart from Winzip which is also quite a lot older), finding such a problem in a product doesn’t leave the best impression with me.

                Thanks
                Oliver

                TBGBe 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • TBGBe
                  TBGBe @olivers last edited by

                  @olivers:

                  I didn’t assume there would be more than one possible length for the evaluation period… from the dialog appearing on startup, it looks like it’s 30 days.

                  Now I understand, you were referring to the license “evaluation” period.
                  After the 30 days period has expired PowerArchiver shows a “nag” screen (at startup) if you accept this - there is no other limitation. No features are disabled and the program is fully functional. I guess you could continue in that mode until 9.5 is available. However, the evaluation period will not then restart, so you will still get the “nag” screen when trying 9.5 as well.

                  @olivers:

                  I’m also getting the impression that for a version 9.5 … finding such a problem in a product doesn’t leave the best impression with me.

                  OK, that is why you evaluate programs, to decide if they suit your usage requirements.
                  Hopefully, even if you decide against it now :eek: you will try it again when 9.5 is available (my guess would be in about two months time).

                  Personally, I don’t have a requirement to navigate/browse within archive files so have never noticed this slow/re-loading problem. My requirement was multi-format support and flexible explorer shell integration. For this, PowerArchiver suited me better than any other utility I tried (paid or free).
                  Of course, as registration of PowerArchiver also includes the commandline version (PACL) and the Outlook Plugin - there are extra bonuses :D

                  O 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • O
                    olivers @TBGBe last edited by

                    I just wanted to mention this: I have since bought a license for PowerArchiver and right now I’m looking at the new beta of PA 2006. Working with the same complex archives as before, the handling is now super fast! It only takes a few seconds at the start to read the structure (from a network drive, even) and after that I can navigate the hierarchy without further delays. Great work!

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

                      @olivers:

                      I just wanted to mention this: I have since bought a license for PowerArchiver and right now I’m looking at the new beta of PA 2006. Working with the same complex archives as before, the handling is now super fast! It only takes a few seconds at the start to read the structure (from a network drive, even) and after that I can navigate the hierarchy without further delays. Great work!

                      good decision then, eh? :-)

                      thanks…

                      R 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • R
                        Ricco @spwolf last edited by

                        Quite agree. The performance is much faster in reading archive structure. And the support of ISO and BIN file really excited me. I think PA worths more than it costs!

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