Author Topic: Is WinZip still worth updating? (Read 71,744 times)

oblivion · « **on:** February 07, 2012, 09:56 AM »

I've had a paid license for WinZip since the Nico Mac days.

I've been getting more and more reluctant to stay current with it; I have the ability to create zipfiles with Directory Opus, my primary file manager, and if I want better than "normal" zip compression there's always 7zip...

But I still regard Winzip as the de facto standard, despite all this.

So now Winzip's on v16 and they want me to upgrade from my 15.5 license. They're trying to tempt me with a freebie WinZip Courier license.

I can't see a good reason to go for it. Apart from the fact that they seem to want me to keep paying for something I already have and the only important new functionality in recent years is effectively proprietary technology that only reduces my confidence that I can unzip a zipfile with pretty much anything including native Windows. The last couple of upgrades haven't given me anything new that I've cared about and I can't see that this one will either. I like the interface but rarely use it, because the shell integration is actually all I need about 80% of the time.

So... what does everyone think? Do I finally cut WinZip loose, on the assumption that the program's sailing off into the sunset pretty much regardless and it might as well do it without my investment? Or am I missing something that might be (or become) important if I don't upgrade again?

Josh · « **Reply #1 on:** February 07, 2012, 09:58 AM »

People still use Winzip?

oblivion · « **Reply #2 on:** February 07, 2012, 11:38 AM »

Quote from: Josh on February 07, 2012, 09:58 AM

People still use Winzip?

That's one answer I thought I might get.

Josh · « **Reply #3 on:** February 07, 2012, 12:28 PM »

If I were you, remember this is my personal opinion, I would move to a tool like WinRAR. I have paid a SINGLE license fee, and never had to pay again. Now, if they were to swap to a per major version upgrade fee, or every so often, I would gladly support them because of how much I have gotten from my license. WinRAR was at V3 for how long and still had major format support added to it?

IainB · « **Reply #4 on:** February 07, 2012, 12:32 PM »

Do you need it?
I thought that WinZip was made obsolete in XP, by Microsoft building the ZIP/Unzip functionality into the system/Shell, so I always uninstalled WinZip if it was installed - it would have been just an unnecessary system overhead.
Windows 7 has ZIP/Unzip functionality built-in to the system/Shell too.
I presume the same is true for Windows Vista?

Josh · « **Reply #5 on:** February 07, 2012, 12:33 PM »

Vista and 7 have built in ZIP handling. If you need more formats, you need another tool.

Stoic Joker · « **Reply #6 on:** February 07, 2012, 12:34 PM »

+1 for WinRAR

IainB · « **Reply #7 on:** February 07, 2012, 12:36 PM »

As Josh suggests, WinRar could be useful.

I now use 7zip (FREE - instead of WinRar) when I occasionally need a decent archiving tool.

Ath · « **Reply #8 on:** February 07, 2012, 12:42 PM »

Quote from: Josh on February 07, 2012, 12:33 PM

Vista and 7 have built in ZIP handling. <...>

Any MS OS since XP has, but it performs like a snail in a formula 1 racetrack, so no-go.

If you have 7-zip, or a possibly somewhat better-looking (though that's subjective) free alternative like PeaZip, why bother to pay for WinRar? It does nothing better than any of the free alternatives.

Jibz · « **Reply #9 on:** February 07, 2012, 12:46 PM »

7-zip is excellent if you just want something that gets the job done.

If you want something "commercial grade" then paying the one time fee for WinRAR is worth it imho. Like Josh, I bought my license many years ago, and it has been on my computers ever since. I would never pay a yearly fee for a general archiving tool with those two options available, and if WinRAR ever moved to subscription I would switch to 7-zip.

It's not that I mind paying for good software, but this is an area that has been "developed out" in my book, there is nothing that adds value over the free alternatives anymore, so paying yearly feels a bit like throwing away money.

db90h · « **Reply #10 on:** February 07, 2012, 01:02 PM »

No.

I personally use WinRAR (licensed). It is very affordable. 7z is a great F/OSS alternative, but not quite as mature in the UI department as WinRAR.

WinZIP? Come on ;p. It's been nothing more than revenue machine with little real progression for ages, afaik.

Carol Haynes · « **Reply #11 on:** February 07, 2012, 01:09 PM »

Used to use WinRAR but now use 7z which seems to have got better over the years and is pretty quick and supports most formats.

flamerz · « **Reply #12 on:** February 07, 2012, 01:43 PM »

im another winrar user... just surprised about many of you still use it as main compressor.

Ath · « **Reply #13 on:** February 07, 2012, 01:53 PM »

Hm, I fail to see any advantage of WinRar over a free compression tool. Despite your recommendations $:-\$ .

Any time I use WinRar (on someone else's machine) for a file I want to extract from a subfolder in an archive to a totally unrelated subfolder on disk, it insists on prefixing the file with the path inside the archive, so I have to move it in the intended location afterward. It's probably a setting somewhere, but it's just daft that it's on by default. Never have that with any of the other archivers.

app103 · « **Reply #14 on:** February 07, 2012, 02:15 PM »

When WinZip moved from 9.0 to 10.0 they asked everyone to pay again. I didn't and continue to use my old 9.0 version, but I only use it to zip files from Explorer's context menu, for distribution on the web. I don't assume people have something else installed to support extracting other formats.

For my own locally stored archives and for extracting stuff acquired elsewhere, I use WinRar from Explorer's context menu, the free anniversary version (3.5) they gave away back around 2006.

If WinRar can't do the job then I reach for 7zip, which has only happened once or twice.

I wasn't too thrilled when WinZip decided not to honor their previous lifetime licenses, and took an approach into scaring people to upgrade. They introduced proprietary technology and attempted to plant the thought in their user's heads that if they didn't pay up that they would one day find themselves with zip files they couldn't open. You were expected to pay and upgrade because "everyone else is doing it".

I knew better and decided not to encourage them. Anyone with any sense in their heads would shun their new proprietary stuff, knowing that not everyone would be able to extract it. Therefore any version of WinZip above v9.0 is a complete waste of money.

40hz · « **Reply #15 on:** February 07, 2012, 02:47 PM »

I dropped WinZIP for the same reasons App did. I also owned a so-called lifetime license. And like her, I didn't appreciate being lied to - or threatened. FMOFMAYH!

I stick to non-proprietary compression schemes and now use 7zip for everything. It works quite well for my modest needs.

About the only complaint I have with it is there's no button or link so I can send it's developers a contribution. There's nothing on the 7zip website for that either.

app103 · « **Reply #16 on:** February 07, 2012, 03:01 PM »

Quote from: 40hz on February 07, 2012, 02:47 PM

About the only complaint I have with it is there's no button or link so I can send it's developers a contribution. There's nothing on the 7zip website for that either.

Visit this page from time to time, just in case they change their minds and are willing to accept donations.

40hz · « **Reply #17 on:** February 07, 2012, 03:19 PM »

Quote from: app103 on February 07, 2012, 03:01 PM

Quote from: 40hz on February 07, 2012, 02:47 PM
About the only complaint I have with it is there's no button or link so I can send it's developers a contribution. There's nothing on the 7zip website for that either.

Visit this page from time to time, just in case they change their minds and are willing to accept donations.

I do. Every upgrade. But still no luck.

oblivion · « **Reply #18 on:** February 07, 2012, 05:06 PM »

I gratefully accept the opinion of, er, every contributor here that WinZip's not worth wasting more money on.

cranioscopical · « **Reply #19 on:** February 07, 2012, 05:18 PM »

Quote from: app103 on February 07, 2012, 02:15 PM

When WinZip moved from 9.0 to 10.0 they asked everyone to pay again. I didn't and continue to use my old 9.0 version

Same here.

rjbull · « **Reply #20 on:** February 07, 2012, 05:44 PM »

Quote from: 40hz on February 07, 2012, 02:47 PM

now use 7zip for everything. [...] About the only complaint I have with it is there's no button or link so I can send it's developers a contribution.

That's funny; I donated, several years ago, and got a nice (and slightly surprised-sounding) e-mail from Igor.

Most of the time I use the archiving functions built into Total Commander, calling the registered version of WinRAR for RAR archive making, if required. TC has plugins that support 7z and other formats (you need the archivers themselves, of course).

rjbull · « **Reply #21 on:** February 07, 2012, 08:27 PM »

Quote from: Ath on February 07, 2012, 12:42 PM

If you have 7-zip, or a possibly somewhat better-looking (though that's subjective) free alternative like PeaZip

I think jZip is largely meant to be a better interface for 7-zip. From jZip FAQ:

Quote

9. What is the difference between 7-Zip and jZip?
7-zip offers a state of the art compression engine. It's a good application and this is why we decided to use 7-Zip as our underlying compression engine.

We created jZip for users who feel they want the same kind of compression capabilities offered by 7-zip but in an easier more streamlined user interface. We have spent significant time designing a sleek user interface that lets you to easily use the underlying compression engine.

jZip is about offering a robust compression and archiving application that's easy to use. Something similar to WinZip, but totally FREE. We are currently working on the next jZip version that will offer additional features that will make it standout, not just as a free application, but also as the best one around.

Ath · « **Reply #22 on:** February 07, 2012, 08:39 PM »

You'd better be aware jZip installs (or tries to install) add-ons, set your browser homepage and add a search-toolbar. $:-\$
Read here the how-to for reset/remove/uninstall

40hz · « **Reply #23 on:** February 07, 2012, 08:52 PM »

Quote from: Ath on February 07, 2012, 08:39 PM

You'd better be aware jZip installs (or tries to install) add-ons, set your browser homepage and add a search-toolbar. $:-\$
Read here the how-to for reset/remove/uninstall

Supposedly there's a corporate version of the installer that does not include those add-ons if you go to the download page.

The installer for the corporate version weighs in at 3063 Kb versus 6768 Kb for the regular installer. Looks like something's been left out.

wraith808 · « **Reply #24 on:** February 07, 2012, 10:26 PM »

Quote from: Jibz on February 07, 2012, 12:46 PM

It's not that I mind paying for good software, but this is an area that has been "developed out" in my book, there is nothing that adds value over the free alternatives anymore, so paying yearly feels a bit like throwing away money.

^ this. I still have my old sub to winzip that my wife uses, but I use 7-zip and directory opus' built in zip.