7zip archives [Poll]

Stuff that's here --> Main page
User avatar
Rex Claussen
Developer
Developer
Posts: 2394
Joined: Tue Jul 11, 2006 18:36
Contact:

Re: 7zip archives [Poll]

Post by Rex Claussen » Thu Feb 25, 2010 16:14

Graf Zahl wrote:If people are put off by this, I'm sorry but they are idiots.
That is a very narrow-minded view of the way things really are. Remember that users are in the majority and developers are in the minority. Consumer-oriented products need to be developed for the majority. Now if 7z was being created specifically for developers it would be a different story.

If every developer considered the user's view to be retarded, and continued to develop products based on what they (sometimes mistakenly) insist the users want/need, they will produce stuff that users will shun.

You as a developer have the prerogative to create exactly what you want. However, if your target is a wider audience than other developers, you ought to consider what that wider audience is accustomed to. That's not to say that there should not be changes for improvement's sake. However, ramming an improvement down the consumer's throat is a sign that the developer is an "idiot", not the user.

User avatar
Firebrand
Korax Team Member
Dev Builds Team
Posts: 126
Joined: Mon Aug 10, 2009 21:00
Location: Mexico
Contact:

Re: 7zip archives [Poll]

Post by Firebrand » Thu Feb 25, 2010 16:46

I think you have a point there Rex, but there are people who whine at programs just because they aren't compatible with Vista or 7 looks, which is IMO a very pathetic way of thinking... if the program is designed to do something and the user obtains the desired results, then the program works and it's good, but there are programs that bloat you with awesome looking interfaces, but their results just don't cut it... but users use them just because they look good... WTF!
I'm the ruler of the Fire Power.....

User avatar
Enjay
There is no dark side in the moon, really...
Developer
Developer
Posts: 4589
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2005 23:19
Location: Scotland
Contact:

Re: 7zip archives [Poll]

Post by Enjay » Thu Feb 25, 2010 17:01

I agree with what you say, and if it were just the looks I'd be less sympathetic. Although, not being able to find a button or menu item simply because it doesn't look like you expect it to is a "looks" thing but is also a genuine barrier to usability for some people. Of course you get used to such things, but not if you only use the program on a rare or irregular basis.

However, for many such programs, it isn't just looks. Many behave in slightly different ways to how a person who mainly uses "mainstream" programs might expect - and 7zip does have one or two little quirks in how it does what it does.

User avatar
Gez
Developer
Developer
Posts: 1393
Joined: Mon Oct 22, 2007 16:47

Re: 7zip archives [Poll]

Post by Gez » Thu Feb 25, 2010 17:04

7z is quite widespread in certain modding communities. Not all, but if you take the Morrowind modding scene, for example, you'll see a majority of 7zipped mods, with .zip and .rar behind. Not far behind, but behind nonetheless. So I don't think having to use 7-zip is really that much of a hindrance.

User avatar
Graf Zahl
GZDoom Developer
GZDoom Developer
Posts: 7148
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2005 9:48
Location: Germany
Contact:

Re: 7zip archives [Poll]

Post by Graf Zahl » Thu Feb 25, 2010 19:29

Rex Claussen wrote: You as a developer have the prerogative to create exactly what you want. However, if your target is a wider audience than other developers, you ought to consider what that wider audience is accustomed to. That's not to say that there should not be changes for improvement's sake. However, ramming an improvement down the consumer's throat is a sign that the developer is an "idiot", not the user.

You haven't seen the depths this can devolve into. I've taken part in development of stuff that does nothing but look good. All nice interface but absolutely no functionality behind it! And people buy this shit even though they know it's useless!

How can I take such customers seriously anymore? It's utterly disgusting how the market caters to those losers who have too much money but not nearly enough brain.

User avatar
Enjay
There is no dark side in the moon, really...
Developer
Developer
Posts: 4589
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2005 23:19
Location: Scotland
Contact:

Re: 7zip archives [Poll]

Post by Enjay » Thu Feb 25, 2010 20:20

Just as a point of interest, here are some figures. The current Zdoom SVN and GZdoom, in zip format (created with 7za - which is what I do normally) and in 7z with "ultra compression".

2,193,115 bytes

I have to confess, that I have never checked that I am using the optimal settings.


The same files in 7z format

1,872,612 bytes

Difference = 320,503 bytes.


GZdoom zip
2,615,239 bytes

GZdoom 7z
2,228,193 bytes

Difference = 387,046 bytes

User avatar
Rachael
Developer
Developer
Posts: 3614
Joined: Sat May 13, 2006 10:30

Re: 7zip archives [Poll]

Post by Rachael » Fri Feb 26, 2010 0:31

The difference in ratio will get progressively larger as G/ZDoom grows, especially if any more external files would be added to the archive.

I'm not saying 7-zip is the best in the world, but every little bit helps - imagine watching your bandwidth on 300k per download, multiply it by the number of downloaders, multiply it by the number of releases, and the difference is notable. 300k could free up an entire gig of bandwidth after several versions.

I still could probably make a script that would convert 7z archives to zip for certain special users who for some dire strange reason shun 7zip completely, but they would have to wait for the script to complete before the zip version becomes available.

Or we could just make a 7 zip archiver with a pretty interface. :P
Spoiler: Zen Sarcasm

User avatar
Gez
Developer
Developer
Posts: 1393
Joined: Mon Oct 22, 2007 16:47

Re: 7zip archives [Poll]

Post by Gez » Fri Feb 26, 2010 0:58

To further the comparison, with default settings:

Eternity r998.zip: 2 307 592 bytes (2 310 144 bytes occupied on an NTFS filesystem).
Eternity r998.7z: 1 697 426 bytes (1 699 840 bytes occupied).

Space saved with 7z compression: 610 166 bytes (610 304 on disk).

Blzut3
Developer
Developer
Posts: 382
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2010 22:21

Re: 7zip archives [Poll]

Post by Blzut3 » Fri Feb 26, 2010 2:56

Eruanna wrote:I still could probably make a script that would convert 7z archives to zip for certain special users who for some dire strange reason shun 7zip completely, but they would have to wait for the script to complete before the zip version becomes available.

Or we could just make a 7 zip archiver with a pretty interface. :P
Although it should be possible, writing something that handles 7zip files is more difficult than it should be. It seems to me that the documentation for the LZMA SDK is lacking and the only (good) example code I could find is ZDoom. I also don't think the SDK has ever been distributed in library form so you would need to compile one yourself.

About the prettier interface 7-zip archiver. As I pointed out in my previous post, most major archivers already support the 7z file format. I think 7z support has surged since the LZMA SDK has been released under public domain. As I said, the only archiver I hear used that doesn't support it is Windows itself. Provided it's kept up to date, anyone with an external archiver should be able to handle 7z archives.

playerlin
Posts: 62
Joined: Sat Sep 23, 2006 6:28
Location: Taipei county, Taiwan

Re: 7zip archives [Poll]

Post by playerlin » Fri Feb 26, 2010 17:58

Personally, I don't really care about the file size. Because it's not a such BIG difference.

I have a 10M/2M xDSL conection, so I can download those archives on some seconds. I don't really care some hundreds of KB.
But I know some people still use old computers or slow connections so the file size may be a big deal with them.

I use WinRAR, it can handle normal 7z archive. So I don't have problem with 7z archives.
Sometimes, I use 7zip program, but its UI is too hard to use for me, I don't like it.
Just back to WinRAR, I still installed 7zip but rare using it.

I vote Yes, but if possible, maybe multiple choice(like zip and 7z both) would be better.

(Sorry if my grammar is bad. :) )

DaMan
Posts: 15
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2010 18:00

Re: 7zip archives [Poll]

Post by DaMan » Tue Mar 02, 2010 10:29

Gzdoom 1.4.3
UPX --best 1,330,176 bytes UPX&zip 1,305,076
7z 1,175,205
Zip 1,531,459
Whole package
Zip 2,597,016
7z 2,225,356
7z SFX 2,387,148 I'm told SFX modules work with wine.
The 3 pk3s repacked using 7z and UPX packed exe
7z 2,216,515
Zip 2,203,633 (ZIP seems to work better on UPX packed exes)
So your answer is repackage the pk3s into pk7/pkz (debating the which extension to use ATM) and UPX pack the exe then zip it up.

User avatar
Graf Zahl
GZDoom Developer
GZDoom Developer
Posts: 7148
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2005 9:48
Location: Germany
Contact:

Re: 7zip archives [Poll]

Post by Graf Zahl » Tue Mar 02, 2010 14:46

UPX would be a major inconvenience for most users - because they don't have a tool for it. Compression size isn't everything.

DaMan
Posts: 15
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2010 18:00

Re: 7zip archives [Poll]

Post by DaMan » Tue Mar 02, 2010 15:45

How is it an inconvenience? Its a 332K download to compress and decompress happens automagically.

User avatar
Gez
Developer
Developer
Posts: 1393
Joined: Mon Oct 22, 2007 16:47

Re: 7zip archives [Poll]

Post by Gez » Tue Mar 02, 2010 16:36

Currently, all you do is extract the exe from the zip and it works. Having to extract the exe from the 7z would not be any different. However, having to extract the exe, and then run it so it autoextracts itself, would change things.

Further, it's not really useful here; using your own numbers:

Zip 2,597,016
7z 2,225,356 (371 660 bytes saved compared to zip)
7z+UPX 2,216,515 (8 841 bytes saved compared to straight 7z)

The space saved is negligible, not at all in the same order as the space saved by going 7z.

DaMan
Posts: 15
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2010 18:00

Re: 7zip archives [Poll]

Post by DaMan » Wed Mar 03, 2010 1:01

We're talking this UPX, right? The user doesn't have to do anything. It decompresses into memory then autoruns. Double clicking the upx packed exe does the same as an non packed one as far the user is concerned. The website boosts "~10 MB/sec on an ancient Pentium 133" for decompress speed so load times wouldn't be an issue.
Straight 7z works for me but if Eruanna wants to stick to zip this allows a way to achieve similiar size.

Locked

Return to “News”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest