News and Reviews > Best Archive Tool
Versions??
IainB:
@@MohKraats: Bit of a long discussion here, with a new conclusion for me. (You could just jump to that, rather than read the whole thing - the "thing" being my thinking.)
First of all, thanks for the Wikipedia links to:
Comparison of file managers
Comparison of file archivers
These made for some interesting study. :up:
Thanks also because you have got me thinking about changing the way I do things. (Always nice when that happens.) :up:
"When given the choice between changing one's mind or proving one's point of view, most people get busy on the proof." (JK Galbraith)
--- End quote ---
When you say:
"...Winrar should better be better, since it is not free."
--- End quote ---
- I am not necessarily sure that is a true statement, nor am I sure that RAR is "better" than IZarc anyway. If it were a true statement, then (say) FARR would be inferior to some alternative and paid-for product, and I can't see that that is currently proven to be the case. Whether a tool is "better" really all depends on what you want the tool for in the first place - what are the requirements? I realise now that my requirements for archiving are changing, or have been changed, due primarily to changes in disk technologies. This is why I am becoming interested in comparing alternative archiving proggies.
This is how I use archiving:
I have a directory called "Clients", where I build, keep and later archive all my client project/assignment-related folders. A project folder can have 'n' sub-folders, some of which may already have been ZIPped or RAR'd. As a project finishes, I tidy up the project folder - e.g., weeding out any junk or duplication - and then copy the whole thing - i.e., including any already compressed sub-folders - into a compressed archive file (ZIP or RAR).
The reasons I archive in this way are:
(a) to "freeze" the folder and protect it from easy change.
(b) to conserve disk space.
(c) to speed up the disk backup process (reduced discrete file-handling).
My requirements are:
(a) to ensure that I can continue to access and browse archived material immediately and with ease (WinRAR does this.)
(b) to ensure that the archive contents can be searched and indexed by Google Desktop. (GD can search ZIP and RAR archives.)
(c) to use the systems/technology as efficiently and effectively as possible.
Discussion:
After testing the archive, I delete the original source (uncompressed) folder.
I was biased towards RAR as it generally has a greater overall compression ratio (conserves more disk space) and it seems to have less (no) errors compared to ZIP, but a major disadvantage of RAR is that the native ZIP functionality of the OS cannot of course handle RAR format files in the generic file manager, so a RAR archiving and (preferably) browsing tool is a necessary prerequisite once you have created a RAR archive.
I was biased towards WinRAR because it meets the preference for a tool with directory browsing capability and RAR compression and minimal errors rather well.
The weight of my bias towards RAR has diminished now though, as disks have become much larger and cheaper ($ per GB), and ZIP seems no longer error-prone, so I tend to use ZIP now, when creating a new archive, in preference to RAR. ZIP is thus becoming more the standard for me.
In the "Clients" directory, there are currently 48 project folders:
* 3 uncompressed (open) project folders.
* 15 RAR archives
* 30 ZIP archivesIn working on current projects, I may need to refer to similar work done for the same or a different client, and that is when I browse through the compressed archives. Though WinRAR can be a bit confusing in the way it does this, it is nevertheless where WinRAR can come in very handy. There is certainly no file manager that can do quite the same job quite so easily. I say this from the experience of having tried several file managers out, over the years, settling for what is arguably the "best" (certainly functionally it is the most powerful) Windows file manager on the planet - xplorer².
The largest compressed archive is a ZIP file of 180Mb, containing many documents, the majority of which are compressed between approx. 60% to 80%.
My old version of WinRAR is able to browse the whole "Clients" directory, whereas IZarc cannot (QED), but my old WinRAR's technology and features are probably not as up-to-date, nor as many, nor as efficient as the current IZarc's.
Conclusion:
If I now did away with RAR altogether, converting all RAR files to ZIP, then I could consider ditching WinRAR and moving to using (say) IZarc - which, as I said earlier:
"...works as promised, and very well too."
--- End quote ---
MohKraats:
Hello Ianb,
Sound to me that you'd rather be looking for a proper backup solution, rather than an Archiver.
Have you ever tried Areca? :Thmbsup:
This app does about what you describe here. It allows proper browsing of your backup archives, and also allows easy retreiving single files from an Archive, allows also retreiving older versions of a file.
Allows stacking of several jobs, allows picking single files or directories and adding those to a joblist.
Allows choise of total, incremental, or differential archiving.
Doesn't allow nested archives as far as I recall so quickly, needs confirming however. :-\
Although I must say that there is no need for nested archives when using this app.
I'd say, give it a try, allow it some getting used to as well (actually reading some manual material :-[), since to have to figure out the user interface, which is only a bit strange first time use :huh:. After that it's as easy as can be. 8)
Greez,
Mohammed
MohKraats:
And ofcourse on Wiki:
Backup apps on Wikipedia
Greez,
Mohammed
IainB:
@MohKraats: Many thanks for the suggestions/pointers. Some new to me there, so I shall look them up.
In response, these are My backup requrements: (sorry if this is off-topic)
I started to ensure that I understood my backup requirements and that I had some sort of relatively foolproof backup system in place since 1990. The backup methods and processes have changed over the interim, such that today I perform backup to portable hard drives using HandyBackup.
I originally started to use ZIP archives to save disk space, but now that disk space is so cheap, space is no longer an issue. I use archives now mainly to make lots of old files (that I am unlikely to want to change) into one big one, thus making for faster transfer time on full backups. I use Google Desktop, and that has a plugin that enables it to search in ZIP archives, but it cannot yet search in other archive types (as far as I know). I am gradually converting any RAR archives that I still have, to ZIP. I only used RAR archives because their compression efficiency was roughly 10% better than ZIP, but, as I said above, "space is no longer an issue".
Any backup or archiving systems which use a proprietary compression method or which necessitate being around if you want to inspect or edit the backups are not of much use to me, which is why I like HandyBackup for regular full/incremental backups and for occasional syncing backups. I can't test them for the recovery of backed-up data all that easily if they are locked up in some proprietary format, so I aim for the lowest common denominator (the prevailing standard Windows system file structures and formats). I "manage" my backups using xplorer², which has some superb locking, viewing, mirroring and syncing features available in the two browser windows it gives you. What used to be an arduous, complicated, error-prone and tedious task is now something that I can do standing on one hand and in little time. I can compare directories and backups in a trice, visually. I tend to weed out obsolete stuff from the backup drives and on my hard drive, mostly using these features.
By the way, in case you haven't gathered this, I should mention that I am a bit paranoid about backups and data quality. (Comes from mainframe computer systems training.) I also run S.M.A.R.T. checks on my hard drives, replacing them before their performance/quality falls too far and before they become unreliable. So far I haven't had any accidental data losses, though I have had to recover from mistakenly deleting some stuff that I should not have deleted in the first place - though it was not "mission-critical". I tend to regard my data as being variously:
* Worth backing up. (all data, and some source programmes).
* Not worth backing up (e.g., system files, programme directory - I can always reinstall those).
* Online and instantly available (on the hard drive).
* Online and available after a delay (on the Internet, in the "Cloud").
* Offline and available online after some delay (on a backup hard drive).
* Sometimes available from duplicate backup sources (hard drives, thumb drives, in the Cloud).Being somewhat paranoid (and very thrifty) I am having some difficulty entrusting my "mission-critical" backup solely to the Cloud.
adi_barb:
So I downloaded and installed IZArc and I right clicked on a picture from my desktop and selected add to image.zip. I checked on the desktop and the zip file wasn't there... is it saved in a default archiving folder? If I move the file in a folder and right click on it for add to a zip file... the zip file will be placed in that folder... this is weird.
Another thing... if I have a png image in an archive and double click on it to edit with the default picture editing software... then make some corrections and try to save... it won't save it in the archive... it will save it in a temporary folder. Is there any option to save in archive directly?
And the third question : If I have an zip file created with IZArc in a folder containing 10 archived pictures and if I want to select some more files and directly drag them to the zip file... they won't add in the archive. Is this normal?
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version