-
The online update feature within the program suggests there is a later version than the ‘.17’ available on the web site. But clicking either download or update just reinstalls version .17.
Either there isn’t an update OR
the “download” and 'update" links should be repaired. -
Hi Dear,
Cannot login and request resend license code for my fd
-
Hi,
When you click on the Buy Now link, you come across four tabs - Home or Work, Enterprise Unlimited, Educational Discount, & Gift Discount.
What is the difference between a licence purchased via Gift Discount and a Home/Work licence?
Also, how can I renew the PowerArchiver Select plan a year after the purchase? Will it remind me automatically?
Best,
-
I’m running PA 21.00.17 64-bit on a 64-bit i7 desktop with W10 Pro, latest version. This 32gb of installed RAM.
As I use the PA pbs system for a number of scheduled archiving operations throughout the day, PA Starter is set to load and run at system startup.
In the course of trying to identify some causes of slowness and bottlenecks in other processes, I notice that PA Starter (PAS) always runs at between 11% and 15% of CPU (see screenshot), usually at about 12-13%. This is by far the highest demanding process on the system, as shown by Task Manager. In Performance Monitor, PAS Average CPU is 8.32, with every other process at less that 1 i.e. in decimal places only.
Task Manager also shows PAS Power Usage as “Very High”, and is the only process shown thus.
I have looked again at the information about PAS at https://wiki.powerarchiver.com/en:help:details:powerarchiver_starter, which was last modified in 2016. The article states a low memory usage for PAS of 784k, which is fair enough, but it is the large CPU overhead which is of concern.
It is of course possible to change the PAS priority, but this has no effect on CPU overhead.
However, is it possible to change PAS, which is required only at intervals to initiate PA scheduled tasks, from consuming so much system resource for every moment of the day?
PA Starter.jpg
-
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?
-
Hi. The “Move” Action seems to be Not Working when used in the Tool – Batch Archive.
Using the Options – Configuration – Compression Profiles ---- I created a Profile with the Action of Move. Also set were Zip, and Method Deflate.
When I use the Tool - Batch Archive – It appears to me that the Action Move does not Move the compressed files (basically add to zip, and delete the added file from original location on the same disk). Zip file(s) are created and look ok.
Typically I on the Batch Archive process – I have selected options to use a Profile with the Move Action.
File’s Current Folder Group files from same folder into same archive Add subfolders to separate archivesMy PowerArchiver version is 21.00.17 .
Can you reproduce ? – Or do you need additional details or information?
-
Hello,
PowerArchiver Command Line 7 support file greater than 2 Go ?
Thanks
-
i just registered my own copy and i need some help to set it…
if i set the ‘configuration>shell extension>open folder after extracting’ checkbox, after decompress an archive is opened the file manager on that folder but… if somebody is using a different file manager how to open XYplorer or Directory Opus for example and NOT the MS file manager?
consider this as a feature request also if not available within the 2022 version
-
I am looking for a way to stop the UAC elevation prompt when running Powerarchiver. In an old post about PA 2019, someone asked this and got a response to uncheck “all users” at the prompt but I am not seeing where one can do this. It definitely seems like the way to go though as if I click on “More Details” at the prompt I see that it is trying to run “_pautil.exe /paassociate /allusers /my(long binary string)”. Can you let me know? Thanks.
PS I tried renaming _pautil.exe and this worked, but I don’t know what the consequence of doing this may be so I would like to do this properly, thanks.
-
Just a question is Ashampoo zip pro 4 built by Powerrachiver as it is very similar and uses the pae encryption.
-
Hi,
Is it possible to transfer one of my existing PC Licenses to my MacBook? -
Re: Transfer PC License to MacBook iOS
Here is the email…
On Tue, Jun 7, 2022 at 1:20 PM Rich DiBenedetto rmdibened@gmail.com wrote:
Greetings,
Could you assist me with this?
Can I use my current licenses with MacOS?
If not, can I transfer a license to MacOS?Cheers and Have a Great Day,
RichOn Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 6:35 AM ConeXware, Inc. ordering@conexware.com wrote:
Dear Richard DiBenedetto,Thank you for supporting PowerArchiver! Please find your activation and registration codes below.
*** Online Activation ***
PowerArchiver Select for PowerArchiver Toolbox English - LIFETIME
is valid until - not limited.E-Mail: RMDibened@gmail.com
Activation Code: *** -
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.
Reference:
https://www.intel.com/content/dam/www/public/us/en/documents/white-papers/zlib-compression-whitepaper-copy.pdfCan 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.
-
a686fe8c-93a1-4830-9d01-0b9a4edd9449-image.png
Right buttons are not visible
-
Greetings, new customer searching for help and/or refund…
-
With PowerArchiver context menu enabled, it is crashing Windows 10 File Explorer when right-clicking on the Default User junction in C:\Users. Had 2021 installed, updated to today’s 2022, still getting same crash. Must have Hidden files and folders set to Show, and Hide protected operating system files cleared in File Explorer Options|View.
Windows 10 Enterprise Version 21H2 (OS Build 19044.1708) (64-bit)
PowerArchiver 2022 Version: 21.00.15 (03/2022) 64-bit
Licensed:
PowerArchiver Toolbox Edition Personal EnglishDisabling PowerArchiver context menu using Autoruns: on the Explorer tab, uncheck PowerArchiver64 under HKLM\Software\Classes\Folders\ShellEx\ContextMenuHandlers and the crash does not happen.
-
Hello,
When clicking on the main ribbon for a new version I get a script error message.
Actual version: 21.00.15 - French version
OS: W10 21H2 19044.1645Best regards
WilfridPS: Keep building such good software
-
when clciking on powerarchiver update from within powerarchiver we get a windows for the update but it nows sayes script errors. I think it could be due to windows update in windows 10 can you look into it. By pressing cancel it seems to be ok. It seems that the page being displayed as erros on it.
TAR Archive Support Still Has Problems
-
I downloaded a TAR archive today and I immediately noticed some problems with the way PA handled it. First off, PowerArchiver seemed to be quite sluggish (used a high amount of CPU and RAM), this I could live with if it could handle the archive properly. However, the file listing showed me instantly that it was unable to properly be handled. Many of the filenames were cut off and there were @LongLink files listed. I decided to attempt to have PA extract the archive anyways. First I was given an error that said “Invalid argument to date encode.”, so I clicked Ok and was then asked if I wanted to overwrite the Read-Only @LongLink file. No matter my response to that, I only get 2 of the smaller files extracted from the archive. The archive is not corrupt as I have copied it to my linux machine and it extracted just fine with “tar -xf filename.tar”. I wouldn’t mind sharing this archive for testing purposes but it is about 120MB. Any help would be appreciated.
-
Bump.
-
Well, without the tar it is a bit difficult to identify the problem (I haven’t experienced this - but thatprobably means little).
Could you perhaps provide a (complete) listing of the contents if not the tar itself (curious about the reference to @LongLink )?
-
I was able to reproduce it - it seems that the issue is with filenames+path over 255 characters (Windows limit), which should not be the issue even if there is an Windows limitation there.
We will have to report it engine developers, since it is definetly an engine issue.
Thanks for finding it.regards,
-
Actually, the archive name itself was about 50 characters and contained filenames that were 50-60 characters each that were all in a directory which had a name of about 50 characters. Even if these were all added up I don’t think any of the files got near to the 255 limit.
Unfortunately, it appears as though I allowed my carelessness to get the best of me and I am no longer in possession of this archive (neither is my recycling bin).
At least one problem was found and should be fixed. :)
-
Not sure if this is the same problem (or the same solution), but it appears that there is a filename length restriction for TAR format.
name = 94 chars (98 with ext) OK
name = 95 chars (99 with ext) fails - TAR is not created.Note: No Path is being stored. Other compression fromats work OK with name = 95 chars (99 with ext).
(checked in 9.00.34 test - same) - see attachment.
-
Same problem.
We have recorded it and will check it for 9.1.
-
I came across another archive with a very similar issue described in the first post, now that I have it I decided to take a screenshot of it to hopefully help with debugging (in case its not already been fully identified).
Feel free to ignore the what type of content is actually in the archive. :)
-
The issue has already been fully identified - we have addressed this problem for 9.1
-
Ok, sorry for the redundancy, thanks for fixing the problem, looking forward to 9.1. :)
