>> What, in your opinion, does WinZip offer that 7-Zip does not?<<
I would not know. I registered WinZip a long time ago and it does everything I have ever needed with respect to compression/decompression, and I am happy to pay those developers for their effort in making my life better when working with compressed files. I am not compelled to look at anything else at this time, but this is not about me. This whole thread is centered around the original discussion of authors of software having the *audacity* of turning off their software after a 45 day trial, which people are informed of in advance of their using the software. All I am saying is people should not complain about it. There is nothing to be complaining about. You want WinZip, pay them. You don't need WinZip or think this is a simple utility that should be available for free then go get the free one that fits the need. >> Being able to compress/decompress is "required", but it doesn't follow that only one such utility that can do this is "required".<< I agree. All I said is using a utility to work with ZIPs is required. My position in this thread is not that WinZip is required, rather, you need to pay for it if you want to use it past the trial. That is all. Unfortunately people have taken advantage of the "loophole" that the software was not smart enough to stop working after the trial period, and were not embarrassed enough when it counted the days it was in use against the licensing. >> They sound like jerks then. If there are free versions that out- perform >> WinZip, but they insist on using WinZip without paying for it, then they are simply jerks. Period.<< >> And rather than using derogatory terms such as "cheapskate" to characterize >> such people, I would call them "wise" or "thrifty".<< All I said is anyone who has used the trial version of WinZip for more than 90 days and continues to use it is a cheapskate. You called them jerks. I think cheapskate is way less derogatory. I am not referring to the people looking around at alternatives. I am talking about people who are not following the rules. >> That is a completely wrong and libelous ad hominem argument, and frankly, I'm surprised that you would sink to that.<< I forgot to add the <g> behind it, and because of this I apologize. Too few hours of sleep. I didn't mean to get your shorts in a knot and should not have drudged up this discussion. Rick White Light Computing, Inc. www.whitelightcomputing.com www.swfox.net www.rickschummer.com _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[EMAIL PROTECTED] ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
