Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 31 to 43 of 43

Thread: FreeArc 'Next license

  1. #31
    Expert
    Matt Mahoney's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Melbourne, Florida, USA
    Posts
    3,257
    Thanks
    307
    Thanked 798 Times in 489 Posts
    I would consider it risky to store backups using proprietary software that could go away and leave me unable to restore. I guess that's why people don't use nanozip or WinRK even though they are fast with good compression.

    I also don't see the point, when there are so many free alternatives available. I don't see software as something you can sell. I see it as something you publish to sell yourself. If people use (steal) my code, then I'm doing it right.

  2. Thanks (5):

    jedie (20th June 2015),mhajicek (14th April 2015),m^2 (14th April 2015),paleski (12th July 2020),xcrh (9th January 2016)

  3. #32
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Italy
    Posts
    517
    Thanks
    25
    Thanked 45 Times in 37 Posts
    ahemmm yes you can sell software and become the most richier man in the world.
    opensource is good if you are alone, or work with a small count of people, not so good if you have an enterprise to run and employers to pay all month.
    and live in a coutry where you pay 70% in taxes, I add.

    said that, as previously stated, someone cares
    and someone not


    ps almost 100% use proprietary. software for backup, starting to acronis and going to veem
    Last edited by fcorbelli; 13th April 2015 at 12:13.

  4. #33
    Expert
    Matt Mahoney's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Melbourne, Florida, USA
    Posts
    3,257
    Thanks
    307
    Thanked 798 Times in 489 Posts
    It is possible to make money selling support for free and open source software, but only if you can get people to use it in the first place. Almost all of the software I use on my computer is free, and yet somehow the developers aren't starving.

    So I wonder, what is the purpose of writing a data compression program, when there are already so many free ones available?

  5. #34
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Italy
    Posts
    517
    Thanks
    25
    Thanked 45 Times in 37 Posts
    the largest opensource company in the world employ the same number of a midsize manifacture. and yes, all the software in my servers are free, freerer than GPL infact, but i do not know opensource leader with a yacht, personal jet or even a Ferrari.
    someone cares, someone not.

    turnig back to freearc, for me, is almost irrilevant if opensource or not.
    i use rar, and this is not a problem, at least for me

  6. #35
    Expert
    Matt Mahoney's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Melbourne, Florida, USA
    Posts
    3,257
    Thanks
    307
    Thanked 798 Times in 489 Posts
    rar has a free, open source decompressor which is implemented in many other archivers, both free and commercial.

  7. #36
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Italy
    Posts
    517
    Thanks
    25
    Thanked 45 Times in 37 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Matt Mahoney View Post
    rar has a free, open source decompressor which is implemented in many other archivers, both free and commercial.
    I know, but never used. I do not think people use RAR because ad opensource decompressor is available.

  8. #37
    Expert
    Matt Mahoney's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Melbourne, Florida, USA
    Posts
    3,257
    Thanks
    307
    Thanked 798 Times in 489 Posts
    The open source decompressor insures you can still extract your archives even if Rarlabs ever goes away because there are many other implementations. It is even better if you have a format spec, like the RFCs for deflate format.

    Why not use nanozip? It is fast with better compression than rar.

  9. #38
    Member m^2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Ślůnsk, PL
    Posts
    1,610
    Thanks
    30
    Thanked 65 Times in 47 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Matt Mahoney View Post
    The open source decompressor insures you can still extract your archives even if Rarlabs ever goes away because there are many other implementations. It is even better if you have a format spec, like the RFCs for deflate format.

    Why not use nanozip? It is fast with better compression than rar.
    Can you show that many other implementations?

  10. #39
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Italy
    Posts
    517
    Thanks
    25
    Thanked 45 Times in 37 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Matt Mahoney View Post
    The open source decompressor insures you can still extract your archives even if Rarlabs ever goes away because there are many other implementations. It is even better if you have a format spec, like the RFCs for deflate format.

    Why not use nanozip? It is fast with better compression than rar.
    i use nz too.
    storically as the weirdest politics ever seen: do not extract file after a certain data in old versions

    but nz cannot handle opened file as rar, and is far less ccommon.

    if rarlab close, rar. exe will continue to work
    it is not clear for me at all why i have to deal with source code. if Microsoft close, windows will run without a hitch.
    or even better
    Last edited by fcorbelli; 17th April 2015 at 23:17.

  11. #40
    Expert
    Matt Mahoney's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Melbourne, Florida, USA
    Posts
    3,257
    Thanks
    307
    Thanked 798 Times in 489 Posts
    LTCB lists 189 compressors. Only a few of them are still in use. There are some 16 bit DOS compressors that were abandoned in the 1980's that still work today in 32 bit Windows (if you can find them), but not 64 bit because the source code was not released.

    One exception is the deflate format. The first version of PKZIP was released in 1989. The deflate format was standardized in RFC 1951 in 1996. Now after 26 years it is the most widely supported compression format. It is everywhere, in zip, gzip, jar, docx, pdf, png, and compressed HTTP transfers. It's not because the compression is good. gzip and zip are ranked 135th and 136th on LTCB. It is because the format is open source, fully specified, free of patents, and free to use. It is also supported. zlib was last updated in 2013.

    There is a good chance that rar will still work for years after Rarlabs goes away. Or maybe they will change their policy like deflate. Who knows? I imagine they are not making a lot of money selling the software.

    And yes, Windows might work better if Microsoft went away because it wouldn't take an hour to reboot my PC because it wants to install updates. But then the security vulnerabilities that are discovered about every day would never get fixed.

  12. #41
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    926
    Thanks
    58
    Thanked 116 Times in 93 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Jarek View Post
    And, as you are changing the format, maybe replace the outdated Huffman to catch up with lzturbo: http://encode.su/threads/2017-LzTurb...ll=1#post39815
    Quote Originally Posted by JangoFatXL View Post
    No. It is because you dropped a brick by suggesting Bulat using that program...
    Quote Originally Posted by Jarek View Post
    I apology, I was thinking about Tornado.

    You just keep stomping around in it. I'm not sure you know you ran blind into a minefield. but please stop and get out of it.
    That was so hilarious i nearly spit my cereal out reading you replying with Tornado.

  13. #42
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Italy
    Posts
    517
    Thanks
    25
    Thanked 45 Times in 37 Posts
    i do not think than zip is everywhere because it is open.
    not at all.
    pkzip start as a closed source and become the de facto standard.
    then the programmer. die, then deflate was standardizated

    if something. is a de. facto standard (like windows) do not need. to be open.
    and if something is not accepted you can open widely, but noone cares.
    a zillion of image compression and format teach that ancient jpeg still remain 1000000000 times more. common

    and no, you cannot compile as it is a 16 bit program on currently 64 bit compiler.
    you do not have. the source of acronis or veeam, but those are the de facto standard.

    so, for me, a closed source freearc next generation will be good enough.
    if better than zpaq
    Last edited by fcorbelli; 19th April 2015 at 22:08.

  14. #43
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Italy
    Posts
    517
    Thanks
    25
    Thanked 45 Times in 37 Posts
    this damned smartphone really hate english...
    but it is chinese

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Similar Threads

  1. FreeArc
    By Bulat Ziganshin in forum Data Compression
    Replies: 3165
    Last Post: 12th December 2020, 06:25
  2. How freearc could be even better
    By calthax in forum Data Compression
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 17th August 2014, 19:40
  3. Replies: 46
    Last Post: 1st October 2013, 20:14
  4. Rereleasing packJPG under a different license
    By packDEV in forum The Off-Topic Lounge
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 28th February 2012, 21:01
  5. On OSS license
    By Cyan in forum Data Compression
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 27th April 2011, 13:27

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •