Re: WinZip vs. WinRar
- From: "Sophie Adams" <sadams3@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2006 02:15:47 GMT
Paul Johnson wrote:
I wouldn't bother with WinZip, and rar files are a pain since you
have to get a seperate program on most OS's to deal with rar, but zip
is common on Windows and Linux both. XP calls .zip files compressed
folders, and work just like folders in Windows. Sure beats dealing
with WinZip or WinRar...
ZIP files work "just like folders"? Really? So you can run
applications right from a ZIP file? No, you can't--you need to extract
the archive first.
There are many good archivers, for both Windows and Linux, that can open
RAR files. Many of them are free.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: WinZip vs. WinRar
- From: Paul Johnson
- Re: WinZip vs. WinRar
- From: cquirke (MVP Windows shell/user)
- Re: WinZip vs. WinRar
- References:
- WinZip vs. WinRar
- From: Dennis Snelgrove
- Re: WinZip vs. WinRar
- From: Paul Johnson
- WinZip vs. WinRar
- Prev by Date: Re: key7boary7
- Next by Date: Re: changing FAT32 to NTFS
- Previous by thread: Re: WinZip vs. WinRar
- Next by thread: Re: WinZip vs. WinRar
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|