Just want to know the most preferred archive format.

 

Rar can has a recovery record, so you can recover from errors if it's included, otherwise 7Z has better compression. Or use 7z+Par2 for compression+recovery?

 

I ticked WinRAR because...

On my PC, I use RAR (WinRAR) as No.1 because it integrates into Explorer well with drag-n-drop etc.

7zip as No.2 only to extract something I've downloaded in this format.
Yes 7zip does often have tighter compression than WinRAR, unfortunately it does not integrate as well into Explorer as WinRAR.

In some situations WinZip actually has tighter compression than WinRAR but usually not.

 

I love 7z for its compression ratio, only if I have to download very big files split in many parts I still feel safer with RAR (recovery record).
But 7zip for all other duties is my go to. With AES256 encryption if needed. I also use often .dmg disk images but that's another story.

 

WinRar & 7Z

 

7Zip or RAR

7Zip compress more, freeware AND open source.Less options.

WinRAR got more options, good ratio too...but if you don't use the last version, it just don't work.
No backward compatibility (probably on purpose to make you buy the last version if you use a cracked one ).

So my vote go to 7Zip I've got too much troubles with non-opening RAR archives...

 

I am one of the folks that hates 7-Zip. Stupid ugly interface, hasn't been a new version in years, etc. WinRAR is better for me in just about every way, I don't really care if the 7-zip format squeezes in a couple of extra bytes. WinRAR 5.10 coming out soon, 7-Zip...chirp chirp.

People complaining about having to use the latest WinRAR version to extract the new rar5 format...who cares, you probably don't pay for it anyway and therefore should be using the latest version.