<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: 7-Zip VS WinZip V.12 &#8211; Best compression method</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.online-tech-tips.com/software-reviews/winzip-vs-7-zip-best-compression-method/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.online-tech-tips.com/software-reviews/winzip-vs-7-zip-best-compression-method/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 23 Nov 2009 04:59:48 -0600</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: MikeyVA</title>
		<link>http://www.online-tech-tips.com/software-reviews/winzip-vs-7-zip-best-compression-method/comment-page-1/#comment-26113</link>
		<dc:creator>MikeyVA</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Oct 2009 15:24:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.online-tech-tips.com/?p=11578#comment-26113</guid>
		<description>I don&#039;t think he was promoting 7-zip so much as highlighting that 7-zip (a free open source tool) outperformed a commercial tool that is $50!  Even if the difference is neglible, it deflates (sorry) my expectations for the commercial tool.  Why pay $50?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t think he was promoting 7-zip so much as highlighting that 7-zip (a free open source tool) outperformed a commercial tool that is $50!  Even if the difference is neglible, it deflates (sorry) my expectations for the commercial tool.  Why pay $50?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: mrsleep</title>
		<link>http://www.online-tech-tips.com/software-reviews/winzip-vs-7-zip-best-compression-method/comment-page-1/#comment-25398</link>
		<dc:creator>mrsleep</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Oct 2009 15:21:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.online-tech-tips.com/?p=11578#comment-25398</guid>
		<description>Seriously?
You&#039;re excited about .02%?

With the sizes of drives today, saving 20k, or even 100k just isn&#039;t that big of a deal.

I agree the 7zip is a great tool, but to make multiple blog posts pimping it?
I sure hope they are paying you, or you&#039;re getting something out of it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Seriously?<br />
You&#8217;re excited about .02%?</p>
<p>With the sizes of drives today, saving 20k, or even 100k just isn&#8217;t that big of a deal.</p>
<p>I agree the 7zip is a great tool, but to make multiple blog posts pimping it?<br />
I sure hope they are paying you, or you&#8217;re getting something out of it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Andrius Burlega</title>
		<link>http://www.online-tech-tips.com/software-reviews/winzip-vs-7-zip-best-compression-method/comment-page-1/#comment-23745</link>
		<dc:creator>Andrius Burlega</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 21 Aug 2009 14:48:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.online-tech-tips.com/?p=11578#comment-23745</guid>
		<description>Trying to compress wav files. Will RAR be able to do something to reduce the size?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Trying to compress wav files. Will RAR be able to do something to reduce the size?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: VahidR</title>
		<link>http://www.online-tech-tips.com/software-reviews/winzip-vs-7-zip-best-compression-method/comment-page-1/#comment-23567</link>
		<dc:creator>VahidR</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 15 Aug 2009 08:15:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.online-tech-tips.com/?p=11578#comment-23567</guid>
		<description>for a general purpose the 7-zip is the best choice.the new Lzma algorithm have been optimized and is much faster and more efficient. at a glance compare followed:

Speed : 
1-WinRar &gt; Zip 
2-WinRar &gt; Rar
3-7-zip  &gt; Lzma

Compression Ratio: 

1-7-zip  &gt; Lzma (Ultra method)
2-WinRar &gt; Rar(Solid-on and best method)
3-WinRar &gt; zip

user friendly: 
1-WinRar 
2-Winzip
3-7-zip

but remember it&#039;s not the whole story i tested some files that compressed better than 7-zip and WinRar by a zip archiver(general Deflate algorithm used in many formats like Cab,ace and ....) , there are lots of factors like different file type , security , recover ability , good interface , open sourceand license type,cost and ...

but because Rar and 7z format are too near in comparing so the most important factors and :
1-Cost 2-Compression Ratio 3-speed 
and in most 7-zip is a winner</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>for a general purpose the 7-zip is the best choice.the new Lzma algorithm have been optimized and is much faster and more efficient. at a glance compare followed:</p>
<p>Speed :<br />
1-WinRar > Zip<br />
2-WinRar > Rar<br />
3-7-zip  > Lzma</p>
<p>Compression Ratio: </p>
<p>1-7-zip  > Lzma (Ultra method)<br />
2-WinRar > Rar(Solid-on and best method)<br />
3-WinRar > zip</p>
<p>user friendly:<br />
1-WinRar<br />
2-Winzip<br />
3-7-zip</p>
<p>but remember it&#8217;s not the whole story i tested some files that compressed better than 7-zip and WinRar by a zip archiver(general Deflate algorithm used in many formats like Cab,ace and &#8230;.) , there are lots of factors like different file type , security , recover ability , good interface , open sourceand license type,cost and &#8230;</p>
<p>but because Rar and 7z format are too near in comparing so the most important factors and :<br />
1-Cost 2-Compression Ratio 3-speed<br />
and in most 7-zip is a winner</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chorlonga</title>
		<link>http://www.online-tech-tips.com/software-reviews/winzip-vs-7-zip-best-compression-method/comment-page-1/#comment-23246</link>
		<dc:creator>Chorlonga</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Aug 2009 12:00:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.online-tech-tips.com/?p=11578#comment-23246</guid>
		<description>Forgot one thing.

For 7zip, Winrar and new Winzip formats. 

If the &quot;other&quot; person that will receive your file doesn&#039;t have some of this, they&#039;ll have to download the app or you have to send them a self-extracting which will be filtered by most of the e-mail servers. So in the end most of the times you end up with a standard ZIP.

And the most important thing is that output size always depend on the input type.

Just testing (that&#039;s why I&#039;ve searched for this)
14 Nintendo DS roms 488MB
7zip 215MB (much better CPU performance)
ZipX 217MB
RAR  223MB
ZIP  265MB</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Forgot one thing.</p>
<p>For 7zip, Winrar and new Winzip formats. </p>
<p>If the &#8220;other&#8221; person that will receive your file doesn&#8217;t have some of this, they&#8217;ll have to download the app or you have to send them a self-extracting which will be filtered by most of the e-mail servers. So in the end most of the times you end up with a standard ZIP.</p>
<p>And the most important thing is that output size always depend on the input type.</p>
<p>Just testing (that&#8217;s why I&#8217;ve searched for this)<br />
14 Nintendo DS roms 488MB<br />
7zip 215MB (much better CPU performance)<br />
ZipX 217MB<br />
RAR  223MB<br />
ZIP  265MB</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chorlonga</title>
		<link>http://www.online-tech-tips.com/software-reviews/winzip-vs-7-zip-best-compression-method/comment-page-1/#comment-23245</link>
		<dc:creator>Chorlonga</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Aug 2009 11:56:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.online-tech-tips.com/?p=11578#comment-23245</guid>
		<description>There are many things to consider if you plan to BUY any compression software or opt for 7z.

I became a fan of 7z because it compress like hell.

Winzip is ordinary and if you do ZIP files with it, it&#039;s a little better result over XP own zip, with better performance.

To me is like this:
Winzip 12.1 vs. Winrar 3.9 vs 7zip 4.65

Winzip &gt; compresses JPEG in 20%, ugly, good speed for standard ZIP format, bad for everything else. Bad splitting files.

7zip &gt; compresses everything but JPEG better than the rest, good interface. Lacks of many tools. Best Speed. Non-Invasive, free. Good security, allows to hide the file names with password, not just the contents.

Winrar &gt; good compression but no luck against 7zip and the new Winzip. The slowest on Best compression mode. THE BEST on Tools. Best splitting, allows to re-compress any file to the actual Winrar version. Allows to decompress a list of files, allows to compress a list of files to independent RAR files (maybe allows 3rd party too?). Non-Invasive. Good security, allows to hide the file names with password, not just the contents.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There are many things to consider if you plan to BUY any compression software or opt for 7z.</p>
<p>I became a fan of 7z because it compress like hell.</p>
<p>Winzip is ordinary and if you do ZIP files with it, it&#8217;s a little better result over XP own zip, with better performance.</p>
<p>To me is like this:<br />
Winzip 12.1 vs. Winrar 3.9 vs 7zip 4.65</p>
<p>Winzip &gt; compresses JPEG in 20%, ugly, good speed for standard ZIP format, bad for everything else. Bad splitting files.</p>
<p>7zip &gt; compresses everything but JPEG better than the rest, good interface. Lacks of many tools. Best Speed. Non-Invasive, free. Good security, allows to hide the file names with password, not just the contents.</p>
<p>Winrar &gt; good compression but no luck against 7zip and the new Winzip. The slowest on Best compression mode. THE BEST on Tools. Best splitting, allows to re-compress any file to the actual Winrar version. Allows to decompress a list of files, allows to compress a list of files to independent RAR files (maybe allows 3rd party too?). Non-Invasive. Good security, allows to hide the file names with password, not just the contents.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Hellyu</title>
		<link>http://www.online-tech-tips.com/software-reviews/winzip-vs-7-zip-best-compression-method/comment-page-1/#comment-21181</link>
		<dc:creator>Hellyu</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Jun 2009 21:33:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.online-tech-tips.com/?p=11578#comment-21181</guid>
		<description>Hi, I&#039;m brazillian and I like Winzip very much. I want to suggest a new test using version 12.1 of Winzip, which has implemented a new format for compression called ZIPX. The compression ratio is fantastic and I wanted to see the results with this new version. Thanks!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi, I&#8217;m brazillian and I like Winzip very much. I want to suggest a new test using version 12.1 of Winzip, which has implemented a new format for compression called ZIPX. The compression ratio is fantastic and I wanted to see the results with this new version. Thanks!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: LessRam</title>
		<link>http://www.online-tech-tips.com/software-reviews/winzip-vs-7-zip-best-compression-method/comment-page-1/#comment-19975</link>
		<dc:creator>LessRam</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 Apr 2009 22:57:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.online-tech-tips.com/?p=11578#comment-19975</guid>
		<description>Now try it with the new Rar beta
http://www.rarsoft.com/rarnew.htm

Curious how that compares to WinZip / 7Zip</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Now try it with the new Rar beta<br />
<a href="http://www.rarsoft.com/rarnew.htm" rel="nofollow">http://www.rarsoft.com/rarnew.htm</a></p>
<p>Curious how that compares to WinZip / 7Zip</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: anonymouse</title>
		<link>http://www.online-tech-tips.com/software-reviews/winzip-vs-7-zip-best-compression-method/comment-page-1/#comment-19447</link>
		<dc:creator>anonymouse</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Apr 2009 01:59:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.online-tech-tips.com/?p=11578#comment-19447</guid>
		<description>how about how the .zip of 7zip compares to that of winzip?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>how about how the .zip of 7zip compares to that of winzip?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Charles Kane</title>
		<link>http://www.online-tech-tips.com/software-reviews/winzip-vs-7-zip-best-compression-method/comment-page-1/#comment-19167</link>
		<dc:creator>Charles Kane</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Apr 2009 04:30:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.online-tech-tips.com/?p=11578#comment-19167</guid>
		<description>WinZip = $30 (US)
7Zip = 0, Zilch, Nada (International Currency)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>WinZip = $30 (US)<br />
7Zip = 0, Zilch, Nada (International Currency)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
