Winrar Or Winzip?

[gogoily 0]

I like WinRAR more, it can release more kinds of compressed files.

[coolcat50 0]

I personally do not use WinRAR because it is shareware. I do not have enough cash to pay for it. Instead I use something called TugZip which supports quite a few file types. I like it and it is free and open source I believe. It can handle .rar, .7z, and more.

[myfujiang 0]

Winrar ,I use.It can unzip yhe zip file,too...so I think it's enough for me.looool...

[pibraheem 0]

Definitly it is winrar, becoz there is support for iso,zip,rar, etc files

[ironchicken 0]

Depends on what you want. If you want high compression, use WinRar (or even 7zip), but if you want to distribute some files to a lot on people, use WinZip, because although not everybosy has WinZip, XP, Vista and some Linux distros natively support Zip files.Well, there's my two cents...

[holetz 0]

Winrar is best them Winzip cause the amount of files it suports.. but the crompression power of each other is almost the same. Thats why I like 7zip, it have a very nice compression system.. that analyze everything.. for example.. if u compress 10 identiqual files with winrar.. it will compress all files.. but 7zip will compress 1 and for the rest will make just a mirror, so when you extract all 10 files will be there. And this isn't only for full files.. its work with segments to.. like if you compress 2 almost identiqual files.. 7zip will make a mirror of identiqual segments, thats why is the best one. The only problem is that 7zip generate more damaged files them others, but nothing that you cant fix making an inspection at the end.About distribution, almost no one have 7zip, but you can make an SFX file when you are compressing.. resolving this litle problem

Edited January 20, 2008 by holetz (see edit history)

[xavierkym 0]

If people don't mind me saying this, but I find that Winzip and Winrar aren't the best decompressors existing. I personally use a very good program called "Power Archiver" and it can use all the files that winrar can use, plus I believe, more than 10 more. (Also includes the HIGH COMPRESSION new 7z extension which can make a 50MB file shrink to 5MB... I'm not sure if that's true though)
http://www.powerarchiver.com/

You should really check it out.

Wow. It's expensive man.

[Galahad 0]

Well, since I do a lot of uploading, and I'm on ADSL, if I have to upload a big amount of data, I need to compress it... So RAR's aren't really an option... But, I don't use ZIP either... In turn, I use GZIP, it's free, and it compresses better than RAR or ZIP... Plus, since I do upload those files on servers, GZIP is natively supported by Linux, so I don't have to think if I'll be able to uncompress those files when I upload them... Since GZIP is used to compress single file, if I have the need to upload many files, I first put them in a TARBall, then GZIP... Some may see it as an inconvenience, but I see it as quite good compression, and free, at the same time :)I have written a small archiving program for myself, to automatically use TAR and GZIP, and to create my own archives... I have it on my USB, so I can compress and extract files wherever I am, and wherever I need to... And I also use ZLIB, which is a GZIP implementation, to compress data in-memory... Quite good stuff...So, my answer to this question would be neither

[harshcpu 0]

Winrar is defiantly a better program than winzip for a couple of reasons. Winrar has the capability to open and created zip files and rar files where winzip cant. Also a nice feature in winrar is that you can encrypt your information and even the file names in rar which cant happen in rar. So basically winzip is a zip only program where winrar is a program that does much more.

[danielscottisilva 0]

I think Winrar is much better, because Winzip don't have all the options to zip a file, i don't , i'm not a expert to talk about compress file programs, but i can say this, because I use the 2 programs, and Winrar do the things so much faster and better.

[KansukeKojima 0]

"Power Archiver"

I use it as well.... I Love how the free trial lasts forever.. haha

[indrazam 0]

both of these are good... But I use winrar because its got a simple "interface" and as most of the people said is easier to use.

[varalu 0]

I recommend winrar reasons being....1. It supports many formats2. It can unzip .zip files created by winzip3. All zip and unzip options are done in the float menu... which is not the case in winzip.Easy to install though the same with winzip.What more? Its good. - Thats all from my side.

[bthaxor 0]

hmm... well, i have personally tended to use winrar, due to its ability to not only open but also create rar files (winzip now has support to extract rar files but not to create them).

however, if i were you, i'd try out the newest archiver in town - kgb archiver.

it has the highest compression of all - with the ability to shrink a 500mb office 2007 enterprise into an amazing 1.4mb!

it does take a long time to create its kgb files, but the high compression ratio is worth it.

it's not only the ability to create kgb files that i love about this program. first, and foremost, it's FREE.

secondly, it also has the ability to create a wide range of other archives, and i have actually noticed that a rar archive created with kgb archiver has a higher compression ratio than the best compression of winrar.

it is portable, so you can chuck it on your usb and use it on the go. also, it isn't very large - taking up no more than 20mb space.

finally, it can extract a range of archive extensions. so far, i have not come across an archive that kgb cannot open.

[demank 0]

i prefer using winrar too.,cause winrar have ability to open dot jar file.if you like java game in mobile phone, u may know java app which have the extension dot jar rite?