4 ms·
Never compared archivers at length, cannot speak as to the actual features. But 7z has this distinct unfinished open-source GUI tool look. That's all I remember
by auganov 6y ago
Never compared archivers at length, cannot speak as to the actual features. But 7z has this distinct unfinished open-source GUI tool look. That's all I remember about it. It may or may not be true that it has poor UX. But the aesthetics certainly do signal this. Personally, on Windows I used 360压缩 which seems to be a better looking winrar clone without nag screens. On Linux it's "atool -x" for extracting (there's no decent Linux file explorer, so the main selling point of archiver guis is moot too).
- moistbar 6y ago> there's no decent Linux file explorer Dolphin, PCManFM, and MC would all like a word with you. Also, 7Zip is no harder to use than the built-in Windows zip extractor if you use the context menu.
- unixhero 6y agoThunar, will also want to have a say
- subsection1h 6y ago> there's no decent Linux file explorer If this is true (and I wouldn't know because I haven't had a GUI file manager on my Linux desktop since the early 2000s), it's because GUI file managers are for casuals.
- ZoomZoomZoom 6y ago> there's no decent Linux file explorer There's Double Commander, which also works great on Windows and beats sibling-mentioned Dolphin and even PCManFM hands down. There's also Ranger and nnn, if you need a CLI and don't want an orthodox file manager.