Explain Like I'm Five is the best forum and archive on the internet for layperson-friendly explanations. Don't Panic!
Archived post. New comments cannot be posted and votes cannot be cast.
Sort by:
Best
Open comment sort options
Best
Top
New
Controversial
Old
Q&A
It's called "nagware" and this particular approach is used by someone that doesn't want to force users to pay for the software, but they really hope that they will.
So they make the program "nag" the user over and over and over in the hopes that they will get so annoyed with the nagging that they'll fork over the cash, even if they'd originally planned not to.
it also gives them a leg to stand on when it comes to suing businesses (or at least issuing demand letters) who use their software without a license. They don't especially care about personal use, it's businesses where they get their money.
Really, I don't see how anyone still uses winrar. I started using 7-zip many years ago. Completely free, even for commercial use, no nagging, and much lighter.
Nostalgic reasons I suppose. WinRAR was the go-to thing for many years before 7-zip started to become popular. And, while 7-zip certainly provides a number of advantages with few (or no?) downsides, WinRAR still does its job well.
Yeah, it was. I remember when it looked like this
Wait, it doesn't? Damn, I need to update
Damn, you can feel the Qt there...
And before of that the king was WinZip for many more years that WinRar, and before that was pkunzip...
Still use pkunzip. Secure Zip for encryption capability.
Perhaps for you... but others used the most popular windows-based compression utility in existence - WinZip.
Still others used WinAce. There were plenty. Personally I avoided WinRAR unless I was decompressing RAR files.
To-go? Oh I get it because it's "packed"
I guess I'm just used to it. Been using it since college.
Comment deleted by user
It compresses faster. While it supports the same archive/image formats for reading as WinRAR (except WinRAR supports ACE which 7z doesn't, but who gives a crap), it also provides a lot of formats for writing, whereas WinRAR only supports few. I think its native compression is also more effective than RAR.
7zipMasterRace
Last time I checked, 7-zip doesn't support drag and drop, which I use nearly every time I unzip something.
When was the last time you checked? 7zFM has supported drag and drop pretty much forever.
Like a week or two ago. I couldn't drag and drop.
It's not just free as free beer, it's also free as freedom or libre in absence of better word in eng.
Why would you start using another program when the program you already have installed works perfectly well?
Same reason you'd reevaluate your relationship with a significant other, the nagging wears on you.
Doesn't handle multi-part rars reliably though :(
Use 7z exclusively, and it works perfectly. Just have to start at the right file first.
I haven't dealt with those in ages. What are you downloading that comes in multi-part .rar format?
Files that originally came from newsgroups.
Some torrent trackers are really anal about files uploaded being split in a number of RARs files, for whatever reason. It takes less time for me to download a 2GB episode than it takes for me to unRAR it.
A lot of old school friends/colleagues still habitually split rar files at 50 megs, because reasons.
I recently had to download an American version of Smash Bros Brawl to play a modded version of the game call Project M. File was like 7gb and came in multi-part rar, so I imagine a lot of other games do as well.
Everything originating in the warez scene, which has nothing to do with Torrent or Usenet, is released as specified by the sections RAR size (15-250MB).
It's very prevalent for large files that are uploaded to filehosting sites since they have a file size limit. And sometimes when someone redistributes it as a torrent, they will preserve the format.
Some uploaders on private trackers still do. I think rutorrent will try to unpack multi rars for you if you set it.
Usenet...
Can you give a specific example of the kind of multi-part file you've had issues using 7-zip for? Normally you just need to find the part labeled "part 1", or amongst a set like that, the one file with just .rar as the extension. I deal with a lot of split archives and I've never had an issue using 7zip for them.
Tends to be the ones where they're broken up with a .rar and then a .r01 .r02 ...
Its infrequent that I hit rars split in this manner, but 7zip is consistent across pcs for me in not handling it.
I primarily use 7-zip too, but WinRAR still has a feature that 7-zip doesn't: a context menu option to extract a bunch of archives to folders using their filenames as folder names. This is a very handy thing that I need from time to time, so I leave WinRAR installed for such occasions.
7-zip can absolutely do this. Right click on your group of archives, 7-zip, Extract to "*"
Oh wow, thank you, I totally didn't know that!
I still use WinRAR for large volume compression. 7zip has said they'll never implement "Delete files after archiving" which I need when I'm backing up in bulk queues. I've always just installed both programs on every new install of Windows.
I have both installed because I prefer WinRar's aesthetic, it feels more responsive to me than WinZip or 7-zip.
I don't believe that zipping (compressing ala ZIP) is free for commercial use - but unzipping (decompressing ala ZIP) certainly is.
No restrictions on use. Only a small restriction on development.
http://www.7-zip.org/license.txt
I wonder how he gets away with that - because I could have sworn that was a restriction on the Zip algorithm. But I guess I could be remembering that incorrectly - or maybe that restriction has expired.
Either way, great for us - and thanks for the info!
Businesses need quality control and technical support available for their programs, which winrar offers, and which 7-zip does not, afaik.
I have both installed.
What am I doing?!
Because 7-zip doesnt support "show files in explorer after unzip" like Winrar does. I tried 7-zip for ½ hour and then reinstalled Winrar because 7-zip couldnt display my folder after unzipping.
Wait, seriously dude? With 7zip you can just do "Extract to (NameOfFolder)", then double-click into it. Unless you're like 80 and have trouble understanding windows explorer this shouldn't be a problem for you, and should most certainly be less annoying than the nag bullshit winrar gives you.
Im not getting any nag. I "bought" winrar. Also, i dont think you get my point. I shouldnt have to open a folder manually in 7-zip, if winrar can do it automatically. Thats just regression of features.
Comment deleted by user
No
The only program that has successfully nagged me enough to purchase it is Trivia Crack. Their ads were so damn obnoxious that I just said, take your fucking $3 ya dicks. I didn't use WinRAR enough to get annoyed with the request to purchase.
I almost got to that point with Trivia Crack, but then all my friends got sick of it so I had nobody to play with.
I use winrar a lot and have gotten used to 2 sec pause after opening it before doing anything. Should just buy it because its really integral part of daily usage
That's how gamestop finally convinced me to buy a power up card all those years ago...
Back in the day we called it good guy software. License expires but still works.
My wife infected my entire life with nagware.
Just pay the fees. They're much cheaper than violating the license agreement.
Are we talking about softwares or wives?
Yep
Well, the nagware worked. Somewhat. I got the licensed version of WinRAR. I didn't pay for it at all, but I got the licensed version nonetheless. No more bugging popups.
In all honesty they don't want personal users to buy it. What they want is for you to use it, understand how ducking good it is and have it brought into your work.
Who then has to pay for 100's of commercial license. Which in all honesty the winter commercial license is an amazing deal. Their prices are beyond competitive.
Now let's say I have 500 computers and decide I don't want to pay $6 per computer. I build an app, compress it with winrar and someone notices.
At this point I get a several thousand dollar fine per computer.
So yeah they want business to use it.
Think of it like "free for personal, license for commercial"
This isn't totally true (it's try for 40 days) but by not shutting the program down Alexander L. Roshal has made it such a go to program that rar support is now built into windows. Do you think it was free for Microsoft?
?
Iphone/iPad autocorrect wonky accept the word "fucking", it automatically changes it to ducking.
First paragraph.
Go duck yourself.
Comment deleted by user
Because of support for rar. Which Roshal owns and has made it so 7zip CANNOT be used for creating rars, and CANNOT be used in a business environment.
It pays to read the license.
http://i.imgur.com/CKIkUdO.jpg
Ok I'll bite. Then why the fuck would someone prefer rar over 7z? You're already away from standard, why not pick the best?
Well for starters let's take a look at some (admittedly older) tests.
Compression test using gimp2.7
Format Setting Size Ratio Time
7z Ultra 10.4mb 0.166 2:38 Rar Best 9.9mb 0.158 0:36 Zip ----- 15.5mb 0.247 0:31
source
Note that this is rar, not the new improved rar5
So rar is considerably faster and only slightly slower than zip, and smaller than both. So picking the "best" is not 7zip. None of them are, it's an opinion
Fixed your table:
Compression test using gimp2.7
source
Habit really, and the fact that a .7z file will confuse users who only use WinRAR, whereas anyone who uses 7zip knows how to unpack a RAR file.
There are a few benchmarks that show WinRAR to be faster and have a marginal advantage in compression factor, but they leave out the fact that benchmarks can be made to make your own program look good, and the difference is usually a single- percentage anyway.
So don't use .rar's in your business environment. And I don't see anything in the unRAR license against business use, only in the full WinRAR license. So yeah, any business that pays for access to a single locked format when there are free and open alternatives is stupid. This isn't Microsoft Office we're talking about, where users will keep using it forever because it's all they've ever known and also it's basically industry standard. It's a file archiver. The average user couldn't care less about .rar support vs any other format.
I understand your philosophy, but remember that this came out in 1993 and NOTHING compared to it at the time. Also at that time unrar was not free.
It's like saying why pay for dos today, it's outdated and there are better free oses. Well at the time there wasn't.
Also since 2013 it supports rar5, which allows for a a 1gb dictionary and is only available thru licensing of winrar.
Edit:
Also - >any business that pays for access to a single locked format when there are free and open alternatives is stupid
It's not about access, it's about creation.
Also I suggest you read this to understand why a business that must rely on compressed data would want something like rar (I'll give you a hint, check out both size and error)
How is rar support built into Windows? I still have to install WinRAR (or 7zip if I'm a cunt) to open those files.
Vista and above should be able to extract by default. Right click > extract.
Packing it is another story.
I stand corrected. You do still need to install winrar to open except in win8.1
The unrar portion is freeware.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAR
Non-mobile:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAR
I'm a robot, and this is my purpose. Please be nice, it's my first day at work! PM u/xl0 if I'm causing any trouble!
Ahhh, that's cool. I'm totally thinking in the past. I still use Windows 7
You must be new here.
HI! Internet old man here. Let me explain the concept of demos, trialware, shareware, and commercial products, as it pertains to the origins of the web and the rise of modern computing.
Back in the day, there were really only a handful of software publishers. eCommerce hadn't taken off yet, so offering software to purchase online and making a purchase online was sort of unusual. When the internet was really young, people actually distributed software on floppy disks. Sometimes these were bundled with magazines, sometimes these were just made available on newsgroups and the guy with the most stable dial-up connection made copies for his friends.
Since DRM didn't really exist yet, and bandwidth didn't really permit software makers to let people download demos directly, what would often happen is that software makers would provide a "demo" of their software that was functionally complete but couldn't save, or they would release a "shareware' version of their software that had some features disabled or missing. The idea was to give you a taste of the product with one floppy disk so that you'd then call the number and order a boxed copy, with manuals and additional templates and a product key.
Because of the additional time required to produce demo software, the industry seemed to gravitate to shareware and trialware. That is, partially functional software with no time limit but the most important features disabled, and fully functional software with a time limit where it would stop working. A select few products ended up with the best of both worlds, a fully functional product with no time limit but a frequent 'please buy me' screen that would only be disabled once a keycode had been entered. In 2015 this is quite rare, but in 2002 it was actually a pretty great way to get people to use and begin to depend upon your product so that when they had the money and desire to make a purchasing decision, they'd purchase what they were familiar with.
Today, WinRAR still offers what is effectively trialware without a limit. Although their terms and agreements do indicate you're expected to purchase a license if you continue to use it, this is mostly to go after large businesses that are using their software without paying the proper licenses. It works out for WinRAR because there's a tremendous amount of brand awareness, even in the face of free alternatives, because it is so lightweight and functional and "basically free". They want users to carry this knowledge with them when those users become office managers or IT directors making large purchasing decisions. It's the same idea behind discount pricing on software when you're a student.
In the begining all software was free.
They have huge brand awareness at the cost of customer rage! F@%! WinRAR, every time I see the stupid box it just reminds me how much I don't like it, and immediately DL 7zip on that PC.
You do know if you extract or encode from the context menu (right click) you will never see the nag screen?
Because the author is one seriously cool dude who makes a good product, and is hoping people who use it a lot will pay for it. I ever meet the guy, I'll buy him a drink, or see if I can get him laid, or whatever... NB: I have no financial interest in WinRAR, and I did buy a license. I also used it for a while before I got the license.
Simple they hope we will but don't bother to secure their product. They have huge brand awareness at no cost.
This link should explain it in greater detail.
http://www.howtogeek.com/120772/the-secret-winrar-test-comic/
I'd actually buy WINRAR if it wasn't so damn expensive.
Comment deleted by user
Euro for me, and I consider that quite expensive for a software that I can get a free alternative of.
Except you can't. Winrar is the only program that can create a rar
Right, a little expensive for such a small program. They should make personal licenses $5
Do it
7zip master race
TIL there is a minimum post length in eli5, eat a dick automodbot.
I came here to say something like this, then I realized what I was going to say was super pretentious, then I saw your post and realized someone had already been more pretentious than I even intended, then I started responding to it, then I realized I was not sure how to end this agony-inducing chain of comma splices, then I figured something out.
Two things: This and This
Comment deleted by user
The superior product that cannot create a rar file (which is superior to both zip and 7z archives)
Comment deleted by user
Look at the table I listed (and a nice user fixed)
Rar is by far the smallest archive and is 5 times faster than 7zip. It's only fractionally slow than a regular zip, however it is half the size.
None of this matters today, but when it was relevant (1993) computers were considerably different.
Considering the fastest processor at the time was a 60hz (no I didn't forget the m or g) which cost $872 (the then price) and each pc had less than 1mb of ram.
Fuck winsock just came out allowing windows to have a TCP/IP stack.
Also the most common way to get something? A 1.44mb floppy disk. To put on your 80mb hdd.
So yes at the time speed and size mattered.
That's fine, except it's driven by the people. It's not hard facts. I listed a real world analysis done at the time it was a relevant product. You listed a fanboy rant.
who gives enough of a shit these days about zip formats? they're pretty interchangeable, unless you're a serious file format autist i cant imagine 99.99% of people caring
its not 1996 where you only had a 400mb HDD to play with, so superiour compression ratios don't really matter
that was my point, but all the 7zip fanatics came in here fanboying about how it's so much better. I had to point out the flaws while answering the ops question.
If you don't like the question actually being answered don't come in this thread.
if you have read my posts it specifically says that all this took place in 1993.
Now, if your done with the negativity can we move on?
They can't really force you to buy it because there's a zillion other programs out there that will do it for free. Better to nag and make some money than demand it and make no money at all.
Interestingly I remember back when Winzip was still a thing, and IIRC they did the exact same thing; bugging the shit out of you anytime you used it. This was before there were any free alternatives (AFAIK) and before zip decompression support was added to windows by default, so I guess that helped them get away with it.
In todays market with there being a metric fuckton of free alternatives, I honestly don't know what the winrar people are thinking still trying to charge people for it. I can only imagine they're riding on their legacy of being the best of the best for some time.
this is true.... Unless you want to create a rar, then that company had to pay them for the rights to use rar so it probably costs more than winrar.
It's because WinRAR trusts you to do the right thing and pay for the hard work they put into creating the product.
Use 7zip it supports all formats and is not nag ware