WinRAR 5.80 Final has been released
RARLAB released a new version of the company's popular file archiver WinRAR. WinRAR 5.80 is available for all supported operating systems including Windows, Linux, Mac Os X and Android.
Existing and new users may download the latest version of the file archiver from the official company website.
WinRAR 5.80 includes numerous changes. The changelog list a total of 20 changes/improvements, and several bug fixes as well.
RAR is the default archive format but WinRAR supports other formats such as zip or 7z as well. The latter benefits from a path increase to 2048 characters from the previous 260 characters.
Another useful change is that the file extension remains visible if archive or file names are too long to be displayed in the archiving or extraction progress window. Previously, WinRAR cut the name at the end which often meant that the file extension was not displayed.
This version truncates them removing the path component and symbols in the middle, but preserving beginning of file name and file extension.
WinRAR users who create an archive from multiple files that are named the same (but differ when it comes to the file extension) may notice that WinRAR proposes the filename as the archive name by default. If readme.text and readme.css are added, WinRAR proposes to use readme.rar as the archive filename. The software suggested the name based on the parent folder name for several selected files previously.
Another change allows WinRAR to read default values for command line switches from rar.ini files.
- Archiving speed has been improved for large NTFS alternate data streams on multi-core CPU systems.
- Password prompt is displayed only once for encrypted search results if the files are found in the same archive. CTRL-A selects all files of the search results now.
- Copy and paste operations from large archives no longer fails under certain circumstances.
- RAR4 format recovery volumes use "the same width of volume number field as corresponding RAR volumes" in the new version.
- File and progress bar is displayed when unpacking tar.bz2, tar.gz, tar.lz, tar.xz, tar.z archives (only total progress was displayed previously).
- Lots of command line changes.
- Several bug fixes, e.g. fix for extraction errors when valid .gz archives are extracted.
You can check out the entire changelog here.
Now You: which file archiver do you use, and why?
They still try to sell this? lmao
7-Zip. Long live 7-Zip! ðŸ’—ðŸ’—ðŸ’—
@Yuliya You have forgotten that corporate customers exist.
Corporates can’t use 7zip?
Just like IDM that is the most powerful download manager, WinRAR is the most powerful file archiver. It compresses files better than 7-zip in many cases if not all of them.
nah, they still have the same backdoor to ‘crack’ it as 20 years ago :-)
Some people might need an easy to use recovery record function.
– which file archiver do you use, and why?
Been using Bandizip for the last year, after getting to know it through this blog.
Before that, used WinRaR for more than 10 years (free WinRaR, and for the last 2 years of use been cracking it).
A classic and still the best. Yes, I did register WinRAR.
Agreed. I bought a license as well, purely to support their efforts.
In before all the 7-zip shills needing to justify their free is better bla bla.
Lets see. WinRAR offers much better usability than 7zip as an explorer, I prefer RAR over 7z for some things because I can search inside RAR archives using Windows Search once the appropriate plugin (RAR iFilter) are installed. For archived or compressed documents, ebooks inside RAR files, itâ€™s very useful. 7z archives, without any way to search inside them, are just solid blocks, not searchable unless extracted.
WinRAR also extracts and compresses faster and with much less memory requirements than 7z despite a high dictionary size. After a 7z long archiving operation (think game), if your PC is low on virtual memory, you often find a PC sluggish and it has paged out a lot to the pagefile (I had to reboot after attempting to archive “Diablo I” a ~500MB game / I have 16GBs of RAM too). After a WinRAR archiving operation, system is still always snappy afterwards. Lastly difference in compression ratios of RAR5 and 7z with LZMA2 are minimal, and RAR archives have options for recovery data that 7z lacks.
Also I bought a license like 10+ some years ago, and it still works, why switch? For the record I use both WinRAR & 7-zip, they both have their benefits and work well together.
If you want searchable archive just use .zip. Explorer can already search those.
LZMA is the best for archiving purpose.
Winrar searches files by unpacking the archive first if you don’t know.
Though I see no reason why you want to use 7zip if you already bought WinRAR
He’s referring to Windows Search/Start menu indexing the RAR files with a Filter handler (IFilter for RAR files) which is freely available from IFiltershop. For archived RARs, it can find any file inside the RAR from the Start menu. No such iFilter exists for 7zip.
Just ask IFiltershop to make it for 7zip?
are you sure for windows
I am a very satisfied long time WinRAR user.
While 7zip is nice, WinRAR’s user interface
suits me much better. And it is a very fair offer:
pay once, get all future updates for free.
Long live WinRAR!
Thanks @Martin, good article. This version is really fast for very large files! ðŸ™‚
^^ Yikes… Shill a little harder and maybe Igor will notice. :P Software loyalty is LOL, BTW.
Why 7-Zip is not always best. WinRAR offers much better usability than 7zip as an “explorer”, also I prefer RAR over 7z for some things because I can search inside RAR archives using Windows Search once the appropriate plugin (RAR iFilter) are installed. For archived or compressed documents, ebooks inside RAR files, itâ€™s very useful. 7z archives, without any way to search inside them, are just solid blocks, not searchable unless extracted.
WinRAR also extracts and compresses faster and with much less memory requirements than 7z despite a high dictionary size. After a 7z long archiving operation (think game), if your PC is low on virtual memory, you often find a PC sluggish and it has paged out a lot to the pagefile (I had to reboot after attempting to archive “Diablo I” a ~500MB game / I have 16GBs of RAM too). After a WinRAR archiving operation, system is still always snappy afterwards. Lastly difference in compression ratios of RAR5 and 7z with LZMA2 are minimal at best, and RAR archives have options for recovery data that 7z lacks.
I also bought a license for WinRaR like 10+ some years ago, and it still works today, amazing investment considering it’s something you use almost daily. For the record I use both WinRAR & 7-zip, they both have their benefits and work well together.
Arrrrghhhh 7zip… does it preserve empty folders ?
WinRAR preserves empty folders. Its not important for the average user, but Java Enterprise Developers who are packing large .JAR files can use WinRAR to help and know their new compressed resource works when deployed. If a zip tool strips empty folders it will break this engineering.
Ok… so its a small use-case but it might still count…
> Anonymous: “7zipâ€¦ does it preserve empty folders ?”
Yes, 7-zip does preserve empty folders during archiving (including adding new empty folders to an existing archive) & during extraction. Tested using v19.00 (released: 21 Feb 2019).
The following old comments also mentioned that 7-zip preserves empty folders:
â€¢ 19 Apr 2018 (probably referring to 7-zip v18.01):
â€¢ 13 Oct 2016 (probably referring to 7-zip v16.04):
OK. OK… white flag !!!
Thanks for the update on empty folders.
My post appears to be FUD and now the record is straight.
I’m tempted to use it instead.
Thanks again !
Oh geeze. An article about a compression program. Incoming slap fighting. Appropriate that the first post is from Yuliya starting the parade.
WinRAR is like a saddle and Rarlabs are like saddlemakers: They pour their heart and soul into crafting beautiful and exquisite saddles, to enhance and your riding experience. But people insists on using those pesky cars, which are the equivalent of 7zip.
> The latter benefits from a oath increase to 2048 characters
I use WinRAR as the main archiver. Have done so since version 2 i think. Else i use: 7-zip, Dragon Unpacker, IZArc, KGB Compressor, WinUHA and more. Lately i have started to convert ISO, BIN+CUE and so on to ISZ. Everything that can save me space on my storage devices is used.
Tip of the day: If there’s some file that refuses to be deleted, WinRAR can murder it for you. Just compress it and check the “delete original file after compression” – option.
Still the best archiver out there, period. 7zip IS good, but the interface is just plain ugly.
PowerArchiver and Bandzip are OK, but if you wan’t to create a RAR file, you must have Winrrar, so why not just buy the best and be set for life?
Why use proprietary format? zip and 7zip are free
@Anonymous Like commentor E stated, 7zip archives can’t be searched.
Proprietary isn’t intrinsically bad. WinRAR does its job well, and thus it deservedly has a large fanbase.
7-zip shill always chant “free” “open source” blah blah, but at the end of the day it’s about how it suits the user’s workflow, not whether something is proprietary or not.
If it doesn’t suit you, feel free to use PowerArchiver, 7-zip, PeaZip, etc. You have many choices.
The search feature was made by third party(iFilter) not by Winrar itself. 7zip can be searched as well if someone made the plugin for it.
The argument is not PowerArchiver, 7-zip, PeaZip, etc but the file format. .rar is proprietary format that’s why PowerArchiver and Bandzip can’t create .rar.
You can search .zip by using Windows explorer without any paid plugins if you don’t know.
Again, Why use proprietary format? zip and 7zip are free.
Is all the prople here are old?
PeaZip 4 Life<3
Did you forget that “serious incident”?
WinRAR has a critical security bug: here is the fix | gHacks Tech News
The company has blamed serious vulnerability issues to Windows OLE and left it untouched for 19 years.
About a supposed WinRAR self-extracting (SFX) archives vulnerability: Part 2 | http://www.rarlab.com
What is clear in examples such as Avast is the â€œnever repentanceâ€ corporate culture common to those companies.
Someday, I think it’s a company that is likely to have some problem again.
I’m consistently “7-Zip” user. It may not be interesting, but it is supported by open source projects and is reliable.
However, “UniExtract2” is useful for decompression.
UniExtract2 | GitHub
Universal Extractor 2 is an unofficial updated and extended version of the original UniExtract by Jared Breland. It brings several hundred changes including community-wanted ones such as a batch mode, auto-updater and scan-only-functionality
WinRAR is fine, but I primarily use 7zip because it handles certain obscure archive types better. Or it used to — I haven’t tried WInRAR in a very long time, so it may have improved since then.
Nonetheless, 7zip does everything I need just fine, so why change?
Two words about real archiving for long terms â€” recovery record and recovery volumes.
WinZip, 7zip, PeaZip, BandiZip? They never heard about the above things.