PocketRAR 3.2 Beta 1 Released

[Janak Parekh]

<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://www.rarlab.com/download.htm' target='_blank'>http://www.rarlab.com/download.htm</a><br /><br /></div>Do you have a need to extract RAR files on your Pocket PC? I personally dislike the format as I've been using ZIP and TGZ for years, but it seems to be gaining popularity in certain circles. In any case, RARLab has a Pocket PC beta version out, and it presumably has support for other compression formats as well. If any of you give it a try, post your experiences here. :)

[dunneldeen]

I much prefer rar as a compression method on my desktop, so it's great to see this for the PPC. The only thing better would be to see rar support built into Resco Explorer.

[shlide]

RAR is a great compression format. It usually creates smaller archives then ZIP and it's faster. Besides that, soon enough the ZIP standard will split between PKZip and Winzip so it'll be far less portable.

[smittyofdhs]

Besides that, soon enough the ZIP standard will split between PKZip and Winzip so it'll be far less portable.

why do say that? is there some litigation or something going on that will split the two?

[Dave Beauvais]

RAR is a great compression format. It usually creates smaller archives then ZIP and it's faster. Besides that, soon enough the ZIP standard will split between PKZip and Winzip so it'll be far less portable.
The only instances where that will be true are when people use the high encryption features of either WinZip for PKZip or when creating a zip file which contains a truly massive number of files which triggers the use of WinZip's new 64-bit archive format. If the user creates just a standard zip file, any zip-compatible program will be able to extract it.

That said, I've stopped using WinZip in favor of WinRAR despite being a registered WinZip user for many years. WinRAR can create and read zip files as well as many other archive formats. RAR files can have built-in recovery information to help recover from archive corruption, and you can specify the size of each part when spliting the archive into multiple parts. ([cough] newsgroups [cough]) I still mostly create and use zip files, though, since they are more universal.

--Dave

[Janak Parekh]

Hmm, I guess I'll have to revisit RAR then. I've just grown used to the tools available on most Windows and Linux desktops, and that's Zip and targz, respectively. Zip is even built into Windows nowadays.

I do use WinRAR at home to do occasional decompression of binaries I get, but that's about it. But hey, if it works better, go for it. :)

--janak

[mbeatle]

I also prefer WinRar. It generally produces smaller files. If you are compressing many similar files into one archive, RAR can be dramatically smaller than zip. Another plus is the comprehensive command line functionality.

However, as much as I like it, I find WinRAR a hard sell. With gigantic harddrives and high speed internet connections, greater compression is less and less important. WinRar is slower than zipping. It does more work to get better commpression. The documentation admits as much. The real killer is that everyone can open a zip file, Most people scratch their head when presented with a rar file.

[smittyofdhs]

Just a note....

I purchased/downloaded Norton AV 2004 and it comes compressed as a self-extracting RAR file. This is a first for them, as all other downloads came as native files or zip file.

[Kaber]

Anyone try using XacRett (http://www.geocities.com/s_k_s_k_s_kru/util.html#xac)?

It does a lot, but no RAR support.

"The unpacker/decoder of formats LZH / ZIP / GZIP / RAR / TAR / BZIP2 / Compress / MS CAB/ Ync / ARJ / IMP / BASE64 / UUencode / XXencode. "

[rudolph]

Anyone try using XacRett (http://www.geocities.com/s_k_s_k_s_kru/util.html#xac)?

It does a lot, but no RAR support.

"The unpacker/decoder of formats LZH / ZIP / GZIP / RAR / TAR / BZIP2 / Compress / MS CAB/ Ync / ARJ / IMP / BASE64 / UUencode / XXencode. "

Yep, I've used it before but it lacks the ability to select a specific file to extract. You have to extract the entire archive.

btw... it does support RAR (it's fourth in the list you quoted too)

[Kaber]

True. I get the most use out of Resco Explorer's integrated zip feature.

[Ekkie Tepsupornchai]

I haven't been a big fan of the RAR format either though admittedly I just didn't know much about it.

I just didn't like how difficult it is to find a utility that reads RAR files and amongst the few I did find, they wanted something like $30 for a file format I rarely see.

After reading these comments though... perhaps it's all worth it.

[shlide]

smittyofdhs,
yes, there is a battle between PKzip and WinZip (http://www.infoworld.com/article/03/07/25/HNpkware%20_1.html) but Dave Beauvais is correct that it is only over high bit encryption. I had originally heard it was a more impactful split, but I was wrong.

Either way, I only use WinRAR anymore. If I'm sending a file to somebody who probably doesn't have WinRAR, I make it self-extracting and all is well. Or if I'm giving them a CD, it always has the WinRAR demo on it so they can install it themselves.

[lapchinj]

RAR seems like a nice archiving utility and the compression is good also but for now there is no compelling reason for why I would need another compression utility. ZIP and TAR are presently very popular and you can get almost any download in those formats.

A good analogy is Repligo vs. Acrobat readers. The PDF format is everywhere and almost all docs come in that format. I use it on both my Windows and Linux machines and all my PDA’s (3 iPAQ’s, 1 Sharp and 1 V37). But I love Repligo and now convert all manuals into that format for use on only my iPAQ and V37. But since Repligo is only for the windows environment I end up always taking 2 sets of documents with me. Even though it loads and pages 10x faster than Acrobat it still doesn’t pay to use it except on my iPAQ. If I find myself working on a Linux/Unix system I have to bring the PDF’s since I cannot use the Repligo format in that environment.

This is the same reasoning that I have with the RAR format. It might be better, faster and good looking but until it becomes more popular I really have no need for another archiving utility. Remembers LHA and ARJ?

Jeff -

[Janak Parekh]

This is the same reasoning that I have with the RAR format. It might be better, faster and good looking but until it becomes more popular I really have no need for another archiving utility. Remembers LHA and ARJ?
Absolutely. :) But a cookie to the person who remembers ZOO. :D

I'm not sure the analogy works 100%, though, as in I often take reading material with me on RepliGo only for myself, and on my device, as opposed to RARs, which I'd move around to expand on different computers, thereby needing multiple copies of WinRAR or a similar tool.

--janak

[torgamm]

Either way, I only use WinRAR anymore. If I'm sending a file to somebody who probably doesn't have WinRAR, I make it self-extracting and all is well. Or if I'm giving them a CD, it always has the WinRAR demo on it so they can install it themselves.

You can include this one on your CD: http://www.7-zip.org/
(Supported formats: 7z, ZIP, CAB, RAR, ARJ, GZIP, BZIP2, TAR, CPIO, RPM and DEB)

In the TODO list, there is:
- Ports to other platforms.
Let's hope they are planning a Pocket PC version ;)

[Certified Optimist]

I also like Rar for one more reason.... Try to zip a pdf-file... Nothing happens... Try using WinRar... and... suddenly you are able to reduce the file size by as much as 50% (depending on the file and content)....

[lapchinj]

But a cookie to the person who remembers ZOO. :D --janak

Boy you’re into digging up old bones. I also got bones lying around but I came out of the mini world around ’90 so nothing interesting. But I still got my Timex Sinclair and PC Junior. Cool. But sorry the only ZOO format I know of is in the Bronx, NY. (Everybody’s heard of the Bronx ZOO of course.)

Anyway, I love Repligo on my iPAQ. It doesn’t convert the graphics very well but reading a manual or book is great – much better than Acrobat. But I find I can also only use it for my personal use since I cannot afford to keep 2 sets of docs but it’s worth the time and effort to convert a doc into Relpligo’s format. It really makes reading a doc a pleasure. As far as the RAR format if it was used I could have to only use for personal use. But still it’s not like a book where if it’s converted to Repligo’s format I get enjoyment out of the book whereas the archive file really doesn’t turn me on – even if it’s in a ZOO format with a cookie attached (unless maybe it’s a chocolate chip cookie :shocked!: ).

Jeff -

[Janak Parekh]

Boy you’re into digging up old bones. I also got bones lying around but I came out of the mini world around ’90 so nothing interesting.
Ah, that would explain it. I'm doing no digging, I'm an old fogie when it comes to PCs. 8O ;)

Here's a link (http://wombat.doc.ic.ac.uk/foldoc/foldoc.cgi?zoo) that explains what ZOO is. It was very ARJlike back in its day (1989) -- a step up from ZIP compressionwise, when it mattered (good ol' 2400/9600bps modems). Just like ARJ, it's disappeared almost entirely.

--janak

[lapchinj]

...suddenly you are able to reduce the file size by as much as 50% (depending on the file and content)....

While this is a good reason I still don’t think that it’s a compelling reason to use it. Generally anything that I move or send from one computer to another over any sort of connection I zip mainly for the error checking and the fact that 99.9% (my own stats) of the world has a utility to unzip a Zip file that I send. If what I sent unzips without an error then that is exactly what I sent - byte for byte.

In today’s world of high speed connections and multi-gigabyte hard drives I don’t find it so necessary to squeeze that PDF or other file type to half it’s size like I once did. But I do have to make sure that if I send a doc or exe to someone what he/she receives is what I sent.

Jeff -

[lapchinj]

... Just like ARJ, it's disappeared almost entirely.

Yeah – OK I guess I might have come across it since it was also among a bunch of compression utilities that used LZW compression (but I guess that doesn’t qualify me for that cookie).

We used LZW compression algorithm in one form or another on the DG and VAX. It does bring back some interesting memories though. I came into the PC world full time when Phil Katz’s PKZip was first taking hold but most people were using arc, PKarc and LHarc (which became LHa). Most faded into history but LHa is still around and on the PPC (TascalLha Pocket v 0.51) which can be found at http://www2r.biglobe.ne.jp/~tascal/download/pocketpc/lha_e.htm.

But using LHa would then have us running into the same issues as using the RAR format. Source code is available for LHa which makes it fun to hack so unless there is source code available for RAR I’ll stick to Zip (general use), LHa (to hack), Acrobat (general use) and Repligo (for pleasure). Pretty cool combo. 8)

Jeff -

[crdiddle]

Has anyone run Pocket RAR enough to know if the Beta is stable or if major bugs exist?