Perhaps it was the contents of my files vs the ones they tested. There were plenty web resources to say that PeaZip had superior results when compressing. I put this out there because when I searched this site and across the web, there was very little said about any of the issues I pointed out. If nothing else, that PeaZip could not unarchive one (in my case – several) of its own creations, that alone makes it unusable. I’d love to upload the files for anyone to test, but alas, private. TYVM!ĭude, I wish I had “scientifically” studied this with screen captures and all. But also when creating batch jobs – easy PEAsey with 7-Zip. So, good luck trying to troubleshoot problems like the one I mentioned. It didn’t help that the documentation was lacking vs the loads of info for 7-Zip.
Then, out of the box, 7-Zip interface was way more intuitive, presenting files in the same folder tree format that Windows File Explorer does, rather than one big bag of individual files (I might have figured out how to customize that, if there were such options, but for the first problem). Uncompression was ORDERS of magnitude slower than 7-Zip. I was compressing Terabytes of files – 10s of 1000s of them. Never did have an issue with 7-Zip (well before or since that time) – ROCK SOLID.įurthermore, it was MUCH slower than 7-Zip when I used maximum compression settings.
I didn’t mention what my pc specs were when running those compressions:īottom line was that I was SHOCKED that PeaZip couldn’t unzip some of the files IT created. Not sure I’m inclined to try a newer version of PeaZip, given my horrific experience and collosal waste of time with it before.
0 kommentar(er)
