Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

New Winzip in the Works

samzenpus posted more than 8 years ago | from the unzip-it dept.

530

flufster writes "Today WinZip released a public beta version of WinZip 10.0, the latest version of the popular archiving software. The biggest change in this version is that the software has finally been broken into two versions - Standard and Professional, offering paying users additional functionality in the Professional version, while allowing others to use the Standard edition without an annoying nag screen. Version 10.0 has a revamped interface designed to mimic XP's Windows Explorer, and claims to zip archives faster. The software now supports the PPMd and bzip2 compression formats, and can burn from zip archives directly to writable optical media such as CDs and DVDs. The main addition to the Pro edition is an automation feature called 'WinZip Job Wizard' which allows scheduled archiving instructions to be set. Almost all the other features we're used to now come completely free in the Standard edition."

cancel ×

530 comments

-1, buy an ad. (5, Insightful)

QuantumG (50515) | more than 8 years ago | (#13452961)

Oh wait, you did.

has it got any new features (0, Flamebait)

b1gn4tb00bs (910640) | more than 8 years ago | (#13452979)

10 versions of a compression program, how much can you do with a compression program (anyway winrar is better coz it supports more formats) This what microsoft did to sql server 7 to make it 2000 stuck a new spash screen on it

Re:has it got any new features (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13453076)

1) You replied to the first post just to get your post near the top. It has nothing to do what gp said.

2) You are a dumb fuck if you think SQL Server 2000 is SQL Server 7 with a splash screen.

3) Your grammar sucks out the ass.

Re:-1, buy an ad. (2, Insightful)

interiot (50685) | more than 8 years ago | (#13453099)

One of the reasons people switched away from Altavista/Lycos/etc to Google was that the previous search engines presented advertisements in the same exact format as actual content. Reputable newspapers don't do this either.

Fortunately, back then, Google was a great alternative. And fortunately today, we have another alternative [digg.com] that hasn't taken this practice up (yet).

Re:-1, buy an ad. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13453160)

And fortunately today, we have another alternative that hasn't taken this practice up (yet)

I agree: digg contains more valuable articles, but less quality comments: almost no hilarious trolls, no Mac-bashing, no credible Microsoft^WMicro$oft-bashing.

Spoils the fun.

tar (0, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13452962)

can still kick it's ass

Good News (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13452966)

Thr's a lt 2 b sd 4 dta cmprsn.

Obligatory bash.org quote Obligato Obligatory bas (5, Funny)

XorNand (517466) | more than 8 years ago | (#13452967)

what should I give sister for unzipping? Um. Ten bucks? no I mean like, WinZip?

Superior, free alternative (5, Informative)

Solder Fumes (797270) | more than 8 years ago | (#13452968)

My favorite window archiving tool: http://www.izarc.org/ [izarc.org]

I guess 7-zip is popular too. Regardless, Winzip is yesterday's news.

Re:Superior, free alternative (1)

evilneko (799129) | more than 8 years ago | (#13453034)

Yeah, I tried IZarc on the recommendation of a friend and I've never looked back. Hell I haven't used Winzip since version 6 or something. I'd been making do with Power Archiver 6 and Winrar, but now IZArc's all I need. I tried 7-zip, way back when I first heard of it. It lacked context-menu items, so I uninstalled it.

Re:Superior, free alternative (1)

nimid (774403) | more than 8 years ago | (#13453042)

Izarc looks impressive and I'm sure it works very well but it isn't Open Source.

Yes, I know being Open Source isn't the most important factor but it as far as I'm concerned it's a Unique Selling Point over Izarc.

7zip is Open Source and it works great, is compatible with WinZip and has extra compression options that WinZip doesn't support (don't use them if you want to be backwards compatible with WinZip though). It also works on Linux so if you're ever in the situation where you have to use a different OS, you still can do without having to learn a new interface.

Re:Superior, free alternative (1)

Solder Fumes (797270) | more than 8 years ago | (#13453061)

I haven't tried 7-zip recently. IZarc worked better than 7-zip at one point (i.e. didn't randomly crash) so that's what I got used to. In Windows, anyway, I am open-source indifferent; and in Linux I merely use the command-line tools.

Re:Superior, free alternative (2, Informative)

JPriest (547211) | more than 8 years ago | (#13453048)

I have tested almost every other app people have suggested to me and WinRAR [rarlabs.com] still leads the way.

Re:Superior, free alternative (2, Informative)

moonbender (547943) | more than 8 years ago | (#13453091)

Agreed. The explorer integration is just great. Typically I don't even have to see the program, I just right-click drag, extract here. Options like extract in subfolder and, when dragging more than one archive, extract each into its own subdirectory are cool too, invaluable if you need them.

Actually, that's all I need of a compression software. 7zip is not terrible, either, but with the most recent version I tried - a month or so ago - the explorer integration wasn't there yet. It had an "Extract..." entry in the context menu, but as the ellipsis indicates, it opens up a dialog which requires you to type in or select the target folder. Which takes an eternity compared to just dragging to a folder which I typically have open anyway.

Re:Superior, free alternative (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13453056)

IZARC can do WAY more then WinZip ever will. And it's FREE! The UI is about the same, so your secretary can use it. Who the hell would PAY $$$ for this inferior WinZip???

Re:Superior, free alternative (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13453071)

wait, winzip isnt free?

Damn you! (1)

Poromenos1 (830658) | more than 8 years ago | (#13453126)

Ok, which one of you jackasses /.ed IZArc?!

Re:Superior, free alternative (4, Informative)

Quarters (18322) | more than 8 years ago | (#13453135)

IZarc is free and supports pretty much every compression format. But, for me at least, it constantly barfs a hairball when I try to drag-n-drop a file out of an archive that is in a nested folder. The only way to get at the file in that instance is to unpack the entire archive and then navigate to the file in Explorer. Neither WinZip, WinRar, nor 7-Zip have this problem.

writing to opical media... (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13452969)

... is this really necessary for an archiver?

What about rar? (2, Interesting)

bach37 (602070) | more than 8 years ago | (#13452970)

What about the annoying rar format? Hope it can de/compress that.

Re:What about rar? (5, Informative)

BoomerSooner (308737) | more than 8 years ago | (#13452993)

Or you could just get WinRar [rarlabs.com] . Free upgrades and a better format to boot.

Re:What about rar? (3, Funny)

KingOfGod (884633) | more than 8 years ago | (#13453032)

On that note, I think it's about time that I update to my WinRAR to 3.50.
And, oh, why hasnt slashdot posted news about WinRAR 3.50? They didnt pay enough?

Re:What about rar? (1)

Haeleth (414428) | more than 8 years ago | (#13453136)

Or you could just get WinRar. Free upgrades and a better format to boot.

And if all you need is to be able to read RAR archives, then you can download free-as-in-beer extraction programs for most major platforms here [rarlabs.com] . There's even source code [rarlab.com] available.*

People are welcome not to like WinRAR for being a proprietary product using proprietary algorithms, but nobody can complain that RAR archives are inaccessible to them.

* Under a slightly restrictive license, but it's still source code.

Re:What about rar? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13453028)

What about the annoying rar format?

Annoying? Why's it annoying?

It's widespread enough it's not really a niche format. And it is actually better than zip on a file-by-file basis even if you don't use solid archives.

Re:What about rar? (1)

KiloByte (825081) | more than 8 years ago | (#13453168)

-rw-r--r-- 1 kilobyte kilobyte 229977 Sep 1 14:36 aa.rar
-rw-r--r-- 1 kilobyte kilobyte 176655 Sep 1 14:36 aa.tar.bz2
-rw-r--r-- 1 kilobyte kilobyte 220352 Sep 1 14:36 aa.tar.gz
-rw-r--r-- 1 kilobyte kilobyte 245739 Sep 1 14:37 aa.zip

Nuff said.

I'm torn. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13452975)

Version 10.0 has a revamped interface designed to mimic XP's Windows Explorer

That's bad.

The software now supports...bzip2 compression

That's good!

Multiple Zip Files (5, Insightful)

jdvuyk (651327) | more than 8 years ago | (#13452976)

The ability to unzip large groups of ZIP files in one action would be a lovely addition!!! I just use winrar anyway as, although it can be alot more ugly, the methods it uses are much more elegant. My 2c...

Re:Multiple Zip Files (1)

cyborg_zx (893396) | more than 8 years ago | (#13453036)

The ability to unzip large groups of ZIP files in one action would be a lovely addition!!!

Simplicity itself with a CLI of your choice. Something like:

unzip *.zip

Is going to do the job. I've yet to see any GUI based interface have anything so simple for such a task.

Re:Multiple Zip Files (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13453053)

Yeah, except for the fact that command won't work.

Re:Multiple Zip Files (1)

gowen (141411) | more than 8 years ago | (#13453141)

Correctimundo.


for i in *.zip; do unzip $i;done


And *that* may only work as long as there are no spaces in the filenames (depending on which shell you use). Ugh.

Re:Multiple Zip Files (1)

Steve Cox (207680) | more than 8 years ago | (#13453045)

> The ability to unzip large groups of ZIP files in one action would be a lovely addition!!!

You mean like multiply selecting zip files in explorer, right clicking and selecting the Winzip options of either 'Extract to here' or 'Extract to here using file names for folders' ?

Winzip has had this option for ages....

Re:Multiple Zip Files (1)

nmg196 (184961) | more than 8 years ago | (#13453152)

Use Winzip - it's had this feature for as long as I can remember...

Not sure how that post got modded insightful. You'd think he would have tried it before posting.

Hmmm? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13452978)

The main addition to the Pro edition is an automation feature called 'WinZip Job Wizard' which allows scheduled archiving instructions to be set.

Why don't they release a cmdline version, too? So I could write my own automated scripts?

(I know.. I know... ;-)

What a ridiculous advertisement! (4, Funny)

kmmatthews (779425) | more than 8 years ago | (#13452984)

Great, an AD pretending to be an article. Not only that, it's for a Windows product on a Linux-based website!

Re:What a ridiculous advertisement! (4, Interesting)

QuantumG (50515) | more than 8 years ago | (#13453007)

The stats still show that the vast majority of people who visit Slashdot are running Windows. But yeah, it is an ad.

Re:What a ridiculous advertisement! (-1, Troll)

MrHanky (141717) | more than 8 years ago | (#13453117)

Other stats show that Slashdot is rapidly degenerating into a pile of shit. And that has got nothing with the user agent strings from the site's visitiors. The "articles" posted these days are mostly trolls and ads.

Re:What a ridiculous advertisement! (1)

PianoComp81 (589011) | more than 8 years ago | (#13453159)

This is only due many people reading slashdot from work. I'm forced to use Windows at work (though most of the development team would love to use Linux).

Re:What a ridiculous advertisement! (1)

b100dian (771163) | more than 8 years ago | (#13453166)

It would be lovely to see those stats...

Re:What a ridiculous advertisement! (2, Insightful)

evil-osm (203438) | more than 8 years ago | (#13453116)

Not only that, it's for a Windows product on a Linux-based website!

Slashdot is Linux biased?!?!?!(Mouth gapes open)

Taco you lead me into a trap, a trap! Curse you and your offspring!!

Re:What a ridiculous advertisement! (2, Insightful)

nmg196 (184961) | more than 8 years ago | (#13453165)

Exactly where does slashdot claim to be a Linux based website?

News for Linux based nerds? Stuff that matters to Linux users?

Last chance saloon (5, Interesting)

oberondarksoul (723118) | more than 8 years ago | (#13452985)

I've personally always quite liked using WinZip on the PC; yes, Windows has had zip capabilities built-in for a while now (I believe they debuted in Windows ME), but I've still always preferred keeping WinZip around, especially for its disk-spanning capabilities.

However, with broadband increasing in prevelance, and pendrives and CD writers becoming pretty much the norm now for home users (my parents, never the most technologically literate of users, have their own USB pendrives which they love), not to mention zip integration into just about every common OS now, is there still a place for WinZip? Even if people continue to download it, most people I know who've used it just bypass the nag screens without a second thought - how long can they survive?

Re:Last chance saloon (3, Interesting)

Evro (18923) | more than 8 years ago | (#13453025)

There will always be a place for a format like "ZIP" even if only for its concatenation ability. Downloading 1000 1k files ends up being more time consuming than downloading a single 1 MB file. As for WinZip itself, I don't think most businesses have migrated from Win 2000 yet, and many don't plan to, so there's probably some life left in it.

Re:Last chance saloon (2, Interesting)

exKingZog (847868) | more than 8 years ago | (#13453046)

Ah, I remember the days when I was the first to get a CD-ROM drive - the hours spent when friends would bring round a stack of floppies, and we'd experiment with the PKZip options so we could copy files from a CD to floppies.

Not relevant, just brought back a rush of nostalgia...

Re:Last chance saloon (1)

EvilMonkeySlayer (826044) | more than 8 years ago | (#13453146)

I bet spandisk saved your butt plenty of times, did with me.. mp3's downloaded on the colleges 4mbit+ (shared with a university, not sure how fast it was.. but I often got files at 400+KB/sec) line, no cd writer (they were large expensive things at the time) so.. it was pkzip, pkunzip and the spandisk option.. I think local computer stores were making a small fortune with the amount of floppy disks being bought. :)

Re:Last chance saloon (1)

PhilHibbs (4537) | more than 8 years ago | (#13453057)

The company I worked for removed WinZip from its standard build when it moved to XP. It is now back in the standard build, because Windows' ZIP support is minimal at best. It also can't handle any other archive format, such as .tar.gz.

Re:Last chance saloon (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13453077)

Honestly, I'd have to say... heck yes. There is still a strong contingent of people who use pre-ME versions of windows. Also, there is no zip integration in Linux. File browsers (konqueror or whatever) may fake it, but at a filesystem level, there is no integrated zip support (at least to the extent of my knowlege). Also, I have seen several situations where zips built by XP are recognized as invalid by other software. Pain in the arse, frankly.

With regard to broadband... Yes, we have more bandwidth than ever, but that's not an excuse to start using bmps for everything, rather than jpgs, is it? Of course not. We could send the bmp in the same time as the jpg would go across a dial-up line, but it's much more useful to use jpgs and have the page load 100 times faster.

Also, if you had read the original post, you would have noticed that the nag screens have disappeared.

Re:Last chance saloon (4, Interesting)

shancock (89482) | more than 8 years ago | (#13453087)

I agree completely. I also have used winzip from day one and this is the first upgrade that my registration number did not work on. Until this point all my upgrades have been free.

I guess this emphasises the fact that they are going to have to find a new way to generate $.

I think it may be time for me to switch. I don't feel that I should be paying for a basic utility that comes free with most apps anyway.

Lots of WinZip bashing going on. (1)

Lellor (910974) | more than 8 years ago | (#13453125)

In WinZip's defense, it has long been a staple of the desktop world - yes, there are freeware and open source equivalents that do the same job and are freer, but WinZip has a few things going for it that those products don't:

It's easy to use: The free zip programs included in Windows, although they are easy enough for most users, just don't feel right - and you can't really expect grandma to use open source utilities or to find other Windows freeware zip progams, however easy you might find it personally.

People are familiar with it: It's been around for a long time and has become ubiquitous - from standard end-users to IT professionals, there are very few computer users who haven't had experience with WinZip and don't know how to use it.

It works well all of the time: People seem to have less difficulties with WinZip than with other archivers, and while this may just be due to familiarity or other reasons, the amount of people who recommend WinZip for everyday use is very telling.

They shouldn't have used a Slashdot article as an advertisement platform, that's true - after all, that's what ad space is for... but to bash the product itself is a bit much, in my opinion.

what the hell (0, Redundant)

Adult film producer (866485) | more than 8 years ago | (#13452988)

Is slashdot being paid by the winzip authors to post this story ? Sure it might be widely used but how about posting a story about an opensource/free compression package ????? At the top of my screen there's a bar with links to "freshmeat, sourceforge, thinkgeek, " ... Does Malda and his crew care about that stuff anymore or is this just a sleazy and easy money making operation for them ?

you have to ask? (0)

Shivetya (243324) | more than 8 years ago | (#13453090)

When they added the politics side of /. it became overly obvious this site was more concerned with page hits and ads than News for Nerds. Incedinary subject areas on discussion sites are very good for generating revenue.

Ever since it was sold the quality of what appears on the main page has dropped as well. The number Slashvertisements that we are subject to makes me wonder if these are not intentional. We can already pay to avoid ads but this sure in the hell looks like an ad to me.

Re:what the hell (4, Insightful)

RobotRunAmok (595286) | more than 8 years ago | (#13453156)

Is slashdot being paid by the winzip authors to post this story ?

Yes.

how about posting a story about an opensource/free compression package ?????

Because no money changed hands.

At the top of my screen there's a bar with links to "freshmeat, sourceforge, thinkgeek,

Because money has changed hands. See how easy that was?

Does Malda and his crew care about that stuff anymore

More people visiting this site use Windows than Linux (I'm not one of them, but facts are facts). Any journalist/entertainer whose pitches fly counter to what the majority of his audience is interested in catching will fail. Linux adds to the slashdot "geek cachet" -- that's what's being marketed here, not genuine Linux news, for which there are hundreds of supeior sources.

or is this just a sleazy and easy money making operation for them ?

Sleazy? From a guy calling himself "Adult Film Producer?" Get a grip, chum. As for "easy," well, they've got to put up with idiots like you and me pissing in their pool 24/7. I doubt anyone could pay me enough to wade through the whining here on a daily basis. Hardly "easy."

or... (-1, Redundant)

benna (614220) | more than 8 years ago | (#13452990)

You could just use winrar [rarlabs.com] .

Re:or... (1)

markov_chain (202465) | more than 8 years ago | (#13453016)

I wish archiver fanboys would stop using rar to compress movies... it's not like it saves a whole lot and it prevents replay of incomplete files.

Re:or... (1)

thelost (808451) | more than 8 years ago | (#13453162)

there is a very good reason why this happens and it's not about compression at all. You should realise that the movies are already in a compressed format and so it *is* pointless to try and compress them further, the savings are minimal, what is not minimal however is the time spent redownloading a 700mb file because at some point in the download it got corrupted or perhaps was in the first place. Now with a system like bittorrent or edonkey it's possible to prevent corrupt files through hash checking etc, but one thing you need to be aware of is that your copy of Harry Potter doesn't usually start out on some bittorrent website, but on some 0-day FTP that only a few very priviledged people have access to. Now if that movie comes in 45 x 15mb files if one of these files happens to be corrupted in transfer, or was corrupt in the first place it's a simple process to download just that file again or for the person hosting it to fix it. However if i have just downloaded a 700mb file to find that it's corrupted I'll have to download said whole file again. This harkens back to the days in the 'scene' when releases were usually released onto newsgroups first, where you have no choice but to segment files.

Re:or... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13453164)

or perhaps you're just a clueless noob and dont understand why they're doing it. did you ever stop to think that if you were fxp'ing something from one dumpsite to another and one bit is corrupted the only way to fix that bit is to resend the entire file? now if that one bit is in a single 15mb rar you only need to resend the corrupt file

playback of incomplete files? what the fuck is the point, just finish downloading it and then watch it

kids these days have no respect

So what? (5, Interesting)

Evro (18923) | more than 8 years ago | (#13452992)

What is this now, Pressreleasedot? I'm running WinZip 8.0 and will never upgrade it for the same reason I'll never upgrade from AIM 4.3, Acrobat 5, and Office 2000: the problem is solved and the old version does everything it should without any new useless cruft (why is Acrobat 7 ~25 megs to read PDF files? And why does it access the Internet at all?).

Did all the "old school" Slashdot editors leave or something? These new guys they have are pretty lame.

what? (4, Interesting)

tomstdenis (446163) | more than 8 years ago | (#13452996)

tar + bzip2 + mkisofs + cdrecord.

Wow... now I don't need "professional" tools.

Seriously, windows users come to expect nothing any more I guess. There are alternatives to "the 10th edition of twenty year old compression algorithms".

I'm sorry but honestly what the fuck is the real market for Winzip?

Even when I was a windows user I used Winimp as it is free, compresses better [when making .imp, it also handles zips fine] and doesn't require me to shell out money.

Tom

Re:what? (1)

tomstdenis (446163) | more than 8 years ago | (#13453058)

How the hell is what I wrote a troll? it's the truth. Free alternatives that often work better are available.

I guess if you mean "we must buy all software even if it's WORTHLESS and anything contrary to this is trolling" then you're right...

But seriously, I do backups to CDR weekly and I haven't paid a dime for the software to do it.

Tom

Re:what? (1)

KiloByte (825081) | more than 8 years ago | (#13453113)

tar + bzip2 + mkisofs + cdrecord.

Wow... now I don't need "professional" tools.


Wrong. You already do use them, except they are professional instead of "professional". You can use tools that are fast, efficient and can be easily scripted; the point&grunt interface is for the naives who will shell out money just to get an advertised tool.

I'm sorry but honestly what the fuck is the real market for Winzip?

You'll be surprised, but try to download a SDK from Microsoft. It won't come in a Microsoft native format, it will be wrapped in a WinZip self-extracting file.

Re:what? (2, Insightful)

tomstdenis (446163) | more than 8 years ago | (#13453148)

And people flame me when I say people should learn how to use computers... :-/

Maybe if people realized how to put a shell script together [like back in the day BYTE used to put batch scripts on how to automate this or that] they wouldn't shell out money.

But you say "that's anti-american". I say no.

I say, if the people at winzip didn't have a market they'd put their talents to something that actually is needed, furthering technology and bringing humanity further along.

These companies that write dime-a-dozen utilities are nothing more than leaches on society. They're not really contributing anything and just trying to suck money out of a stone.

Tom

Re:what? (1)

MaestroSartori (146297) | more than 8 years ago | (#13453171)

Wrong. You already do use them, except they are professional instead of "professional". You can use tools that are fast, efficient and can be easily scripted; the point&grunt interface is for the naives who will shell out money just to get an advertised tool.

I am entirely capable of writing a script, but I prefer to point and grunt. I guess that makes me naive for using tools to make my life easier. Silly me :(

Must compete with Microsoft (4, Insightful)

Dr. Evil (3501) | more than 8 years ago | (#13452997)

Now that Microsoft has incorporated an unzip utilitiy in the OS, WinZip can't profit from people who just want to unzip files.

Who needs it (5, Insightful)

jb.hl.com (782137) | more than 8 years ago | (#13453004)

I have 7-zip...it handles almost all archives I come across quickly and well, and to boot it just works. Why the hell would I want to go back to WinZip, which from the sounds of it is even more bloated than it was before?

Re:Who needs it (4, Informative)

makomk (752139) | more than 8 years ago | (#13453039)

Agreed - 7-zip rocks. It seems to be able to open almost every archive format - I even use it under Linux sometimes (via Wine). What I'd like to know is why the hell it took so long for WinZip to get bzip2 support - I've found it really inconvenient, and it seems to be the last archiver to support the format.

Re:Who needs it (1)

mnbjhguyt (449178) | more than 8 years ago | (#13453157)

I use 7-zip too, because it's free and open, but try to open a zip file with 1000s of text files in it: honestly, winzip (v. 7.0, last i've used) it's still much faster.

Windows Zip utilities, huh? (5, Informative)

gusnz (455113) | more than 8 years ago | (#13453009)

Here's some good freeware ones:

7-Zip [7-zip.org]
A free, open source Windows zip utility with support for several archive formats, and comparatively great compression. Small and fast too; it's my personal choice at the moment.
IZArc [izarc.org]
Not open source, but supports a few more formats
ICEOWS [iceows.com]
Formerly ARJFolder, integrates very cleanly into Windows Explorer.

There's more out there, but really, I can't see how Winzip is as relevant today as it was during the Win3.x days when it was the only good zip GUI out there. I guess scheduling is nice, but then again, all operating systems come with a schedular these days anyway.

Re:Windows Zip utilities, huh? (1)

Tycho (11893) | more than 8 years ago | (#13453178)

Also there is:
"Stuffit Expander" [stuffit.com]

 
Yes it is far from perfect. Yes, it does only decompress and Stuffit Standard, which will compress. Stuffit Expander will decompress many types of files. However, to get Stuffit Expander you have to give up your e-mail address and they will send you at least some spam, but Allume, the developer, from my previous experience is at least not totally scum.

Makes sense. (2, Insightful)

Max Romantschuk (132276) | more than 8 years ago | (#13453011)

Since most people just click past the nag screen this is the sensible thing to do: Give people the basics for free, and charge for the advanced features that really are corporate time-savers and hence worth paying for.

Re:Makes sense. (4, Informative)

keraneuology (760918) | more than 8 years ago | (#13453105)

From TFA:
Caution, WinZip 10.0, when it is released, will not be a free upgrade. If you are a registered user of a previous version of WinZip and install WinZip 10.0, you will no longer be registered.

In other words, all of those people who were promised free upgrades way back when are now SOL. Yes, WinZip has the right to change their terms any time they want and have no obligation to continue to provide free upgrades, power to them.

But I don't have to continue to support their company. Their "upgrade assurance" program is cute, though... for an extra 20% you can receive assurances that if a new version of WinZip comes out within the next year you'll get a copy. They've been averaging a new version what, every two? three? years? How many people are going to fall for that one?

And we care because... ? (4, Insightful)

SirGarlon (845873) | more than 8 years ago | (#13453012)

Why does the Slashdot community, one of the largest Free / Open Source communities on the Net, care when a new proprietary version of some Windows-only software comes out? Find another place to post this nonsense.

Re:And we care because... ? (1)

TeknoHog (164938) | more than 8 years ago | (#13453119)

I'm with you on this one. I can tolerate some amount of Windows-related news, if only for the "know thy enemy" factor, but this article is not one of them. Sadly, judging from the comments it seems that many Slashdotters are actually using Windows to a great extent.

Others (1, Informative)

Saiyine (689367) | more than 8 years ago | (#13453020)


Althought really obsolete, WinZip is extremely popular with uneducated computers users.

I, for one... recommend these alternatives: winrar [rarlab.com] and winace [winace.com] , wich are vastly superiors in performance, but shareware, and 7-Zip [7-zip.org] wich has good perfomance with a poor interface, but it's free.


--
Dreamhost [dreamhost.com] superb hosting.
Kunowalls!!! [kunowalls.host.sk] Random sexy wallpapers (NSFW!).

Who buy Winzip anyway ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13453023)

Just, because I wonder.

All I have seen are unregistered trial versions and or cracked winzip.

Who, what type of users actualy buy Winzip ?

What's realy inovative side to side with opensource alternatives like cron, bzip2, tar, cdrecord or even k3b ?

Re:Who buy Winzip anyway ? (-1, Offtopic)

smithcl8 (738234) | more than 8 years ago | (#13453080)

Who gives a shit about innovation when it comes to archiving freakin' files? I suppose that someone somewhere gives a damn about it, but as far as I'm concerned, just put a bunch of files into one file, compress it along the way, and I'm happy. Saving a meg here or there doesn't mean anything anymore. I'd imagine there's a wide open field of research for file compression algorithms or whatever, but being a file compression research engineer would be one lame-ass career!

/. readers should care about WinZip because... (5, Interesting)

dskoll (99328) | more than 8 years ago | (#13453027)

... it supports a new "deflate64" compression that is NOT supported by zlib. As a result, clamd chokes on some ZIP files and can't scan them.

This pain-in-the-@ss aspect of the new Winzip is the most likely thing to affect /. readers.

Re:/. readers should care about WinZip because... (1)

PhilHibbs (4537) | more than 8 years ago | (#13453084)

So once a piece of software becomes popular, it should be frozen for all time and no new features added? The compression seting has never defaulted to maximum, you have to select it and it warns you about compatability. What more do you want?

Re:/. readers should care about WinZip because... (0)

nmg196 (184961) | more than 8 years ago | (#13453100)

Surely that's a pain-in-the-ass aspect of zlib - not Winzip? I don't see how it's Winzip's fault that it supports something that zlib does not.

WinRar (1)

cablepokerface (718716) | more than 8 years ago | (#13453029)

I always thought winrar was superior to winzip. Can't really remember why though.

unicode...? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13453030)

i'd like to see unicode support for the filenames... would make me immediate life all that much simpler...

This has always been the case. (2, Insightful)

Crixus (97721) | more than 8 years ago | (#13453031)

This has always been the case with software. Once a fairly mature release is in the market, with lots of useful features, they then need to make you think you need the latest features. Of course some marketing wonk writes lots of stuff that people ultimately read, and then they're convinced.

I mean seriously, whenever I boot into Windows, Office '97 provides me with EVERY POSSIBLE word-processing feature I need.

MS has the advantage of making the OS too, so they can force you to upgrade either the OS or the application software at their whim.

Why is there an ad on /. again?

It's buggy (1)

gaanagaa (784648) | more than 8 years ago | (#13453038)

Winzip seems to be ok untill Winrar came. Winrar is much smoother and less buggy and never had a problem with a compressed file, where as I needed to have "zip file repairing tool" with Winzip.

Winrar (1)

smallguy78 (775828) | more than 8 years ago | (#13453049)

http://www.rarlabs.com/ [rarlabs.com] - unzips a ZIP file in 2 clicks and handles about 10 other formats, and also has its own very good RAR format. Why bother paying for Winzip? I'm surprised people use it over winrar.

great ad but... (1)

thelost (808451) | more than 8 years ago | (#13453069)

I stopped using easily corruptable zip files a long time ago, in favour of much more internet friendly rars.

Re:great ad but... (1)

Quill_28 (553921) | more than 8 years ago | (#13453082)

Yeah, that's great. But when you send your mother a word doc it is best to stick with zip files.

just now free? (1)

schematix (533634) | more than 8 years ago | (#13453072)

I thought winzip was always free... you just went to the website and downloaded the evaluation version while you were launching your favorite IRC application. By the time the download finished you had already found a free key generator in a l33t ju4r3z channel and had it cracked on the first use.

Google Desktop Search is bundled with Winzip 10?!! (1)

nmg196 (184961) | more than 8 years ago | (#13453075)

I just downloaded the 10.0 beta version. To test it, I unpacked the winzip 10 beta installer itself (wz100beta.exe). Inside the resulting folder, I found several exe files. There is one 725K file called GDS.exe, which appears to be the installer (or part of it) for Google Desktop Search. Two others named GTB9x.EXE and GTBXP.EXE seem to be the installers for Google Toolbar. Why on earth is Winzip bundling the installers for Google Desktop Search and Google Toolbar with Winzip?!! The readme and license agreement do not mention the word "Google" at all and neither does the winzip website as far as I can tell. I'm also betting that the GDS license agreement prohibits it from being redistributed in this fashion.

What on earth is going on here? Do you think they've just made a silly mistake or am I missing something really obvious?

yeah - no nag screen... (1)

boatwx1 (911800) | more than 8 years ago | (#13453085)

...how many people actually pay for winzip?

Re:yeah - no nag screen... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13453124)

Large multinational corporations paid for winzip licenses.

Is the standard version really free? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13453096)

Article mentions the standard version being free without a nag screen but this doesn't seem to be the case. The website says it's not a free upgrade from v9 and that feature set differs depending on which type of registration number is entered. Plus the nag screen is still there.

Ironically, they're dropping the reason I like it (1)

Maskull (636191) | more than 8 years ago | (#13453101)

...because it doesn't try to look/act like Windows Explorer. I liked the clean separation; archives should be used as archives, not as a stand-ing for compressed directories. You can't really run programs from within a zip file, not if they need to access any of the other files in there. Making archives act like folders seems like a good idea until you realize that there's a bunch of things that won't work unless they are integrated at the filesystem level.

Winzip? (1)

Shin Chan (682232) | more than 8 years ago | (#13453106)

Who needs WinZip.. Total Commander [ghisler.com] all the way :)

Are the files smaller? (1)

Lord Kano (13027) | more than 8 years ago | (#13453111)

Zip makes such large archives compared to rar, ace, and several other formats I'm not sure if it's even worth it anymore.

If they improved the algorithm in WinZip 10 maybe they can make it more competitive.

LK

bzip2 (1)

Erwos (553607) | more than 8 years ago | (#13453114)

Very nice that they support bzip2 - it seems to be gaining some traction in the community now, so it should be handy.

-Erwos

Back to the Future! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13453115)

WinZip Command Line Support Add-On 1.1

The WinZip Command Line Support Add-On provides a command line interface that gives you the power of WinZip without the usual WinZip graphical user interface. It allows you to use WinZip directly from the command prompt and from batch (.BAT) files and script languages, making it ideal for automating repetitive tasks. An extensive set of command line options gives you pinpoint control over WinZip's actions. And, in automated environments, end-users need not know anything about how to use WinZip.

Sherman, set the wayback machine to 1988.
Yes, Mr. Peabody.

all the linux zealots are out in full force today (0, Troll)

circletimessquare (444983) | more than 8 years ago | (#13453118)

it's an important tool

this "press release" is useful information if you work with windows

most people have to use windows boxen at work

so deal with it linux trolls

furthermore, if anyone is ever going to adopt linux, it will be in spite of folks like you, not because of the type of holier-than-thou attitudes some of you display in this thread

why not winrar (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13453127)

why would I use winzip when I could get 100 million better features with winrar (including rar compression)?

I've been using ZipGenius lately. It's pretty good (1)

windowpain (211052) | more than 8 years ago | (#13453151)

Not open source but free as in beer with no nags or ads. Made in Italy and available in English and Italian and more. It handles more than 20 compression formats and offers four encryption algorithms.

ZipGenius [zipgenius.it]

How much did this ad cost? (1)

0xdeaddead (797696) | more than 8 years ago | (#13453153)

And since xp explorer does zip files, why are you even in business? And yes for the record I actually did buy one copy of winzip ages ago, but windows 95 was king back then...

Compression (0, Troll)

RamboIII (899894) | more than 8 years ago | (#13453170)

Almost all the other features we're used to now come completely free in the Standard edition."

It looks like they compressed the wrong words.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...