3 ms·
Sure...but in this day and age I almost consider .rar a "read-only" format. There will be plenty of RAR archives that people are keeping around for historical r
by AdmiralAsshat 3y ago
Sure...but in this day and age I almost consider .rar a "read-only" format. There will be plenty of RAR archives that people are keeping around for historical reasons, but, why would you still be creating WinRAR archives when there are better options?
- justsomehnguy 3y ago> there are better options? which are?.. If you need the interop then you can't beat ZIP If you need a built-in recovery record (and find a working decompressing program 10-20 years later) then you can't beat RAR If your corporate is insane and forbids 7z because it's FOSS/made by Russian then you can't beat RAR Which are those 'better options'?
- kupopuffs 3y agotar? XD
- TiredOfLife 3y agoYour corporate should look up who makes WinRar.
- justsomehnguy 3y agoThanks, I know who and where from Eugene is.
- tinus_hn 3y agoOn Usenet RAR/PAR is still the standard
- Nyan 3y agoHopefully that slowly stops being the standard: https://github.com/animetosho/Nyuu/wiki/Stop-RAR-Uploads https://github.com/animetosho/Nyuu/wiki/Stop-RAR-Uploads
- bsagdiyev 3y agoProbably not, if the releases come from scene groups they follow the standard.
- Nyan 3y agoIf you search up guides on how to upload to Usenet, you'll often find most of the recommend creating split RARs. Uploaders who just transfer scene releases without bothering to extract will of course stick to RAR, but there's a lot of content these days that isn't from scene groups.