So what’s wrong with 7-zip’s shell integration? I think they are about on par myself.
Personally, I hate shell integration, slick or otherwise *, and I’ve tried WinRAR (some time ago; I may check out a newer version). That said, I just wanted to note for others that WinRAR also ships with a command-line archiving and extraction utility, for those who (like me) don’t like the GUI, but like the compression ratio.
- I’m an equal opportunity anti-gui-integration guy. I use SVN, and disabled the Tortoise SVN shell extension. I don’t use WinZip integration, and I use Visual Studio with SourceSafe at work, and constantly annoy people who open my projects because I diabled the damned SourceSafe integration.
I also like to drive standard-shift, so it’s a consistent preference for the manual option.
Regarding recovery records, bzip2, which 7zip supports, has some recovery features.
(is my captcha always supposed to be the same word no matter how many times I commen? because it is)
Zip still is much faster than 7z.
I’ve done some measurements lately comparing speed and size of 7z and zip formats, both measured with the software 7-zip.
Summary: zip is much faster, in some cases up to 20 times!!
Differences in size are not big.
Here is the full post.
http://99-developer-tools.com/why-zip-is-better-than-7z/