File Management

2xExplorer

2xExplorer is a two-paned file manager that does everything Windows Explorer should do but does not: synchronize folders, copy path name along with file name, split and merge files, and much more. I use this product all day, every day; it has become my most indispensable software (along with Firefox). This product has been discontinued in favor of two newer products called xplorer2 lite (free) and xplorer2 pro (paid), but the free xplorer2 lite is no better then 2xExplorer. Grab 2xExplorer while you still can!

FreeCommander

A marvelous alternative to 2xExplorer discussed above. If I had not discovered 2xExplorer years before I encountered FreeCommander, this is the file manager I would be using. It does just about everything 2xExplorer does, and it has a useful tab feature as well. If and when 2xExplorer is no longer available, this will be the file manager of choice.

FreeFileSynch

A solid open source file synchronization utility. The dual-paned file manager programs (2xExplorer and FreeCommander) described above each have their own built-in file synchronization capability. If for some inexplicable reason you are reluctant to try those or similar utilities, you will be condemned to using Windows Explorer, which does not have any such capability. If you subsequently develop a need to synchronize files among various folders, this program offers the ideal solution to your problem. You can easily compare the contents of any two folders and then delete, move, or copy files selectively or in bulk. The program then offers a preview of everything that will transpire when you are finally ready to pull the trigger. Very nicely done. [Added 8 September 2009]

7-Zip File Archive

Filzip File Archive

IZArc File Archive

PeaZip File Archive

TUGZip File Archive

ZipGenius File Archive

Finding a free archive program that equals or exceeds the industry leader WinZip proved to be a more daunting task than I ever expected. All six of the programs I evaluated fell short in one or more areas. Despite their shortcomings, however, all six are acceptable: each is totally free of cost, each handles the basics of creating archives and extracting files from existing archives, and all six are infinitely better than the pathetic archive program zipfldr.dll that comes with Windows XP and Windows 7. Beyond these basics, WinZip had some ancillary features which I came to enjoy, so I used some of those features to further evaluate these free archive programs. My findings are summarized in the following table:

• 7-Zip has shortcomings in four of the five features. On the other hand, 7-Zip's primary redeeming value is that it recognizes the greatest variety of file types. In fact, I keep it handy because it is one of the few archive programs that accommodates rar files which I encounter from time to time.

• Filzip was last updated in 2006, but I just recently discovered it. The last two updates in 2006 fixed security breaches reported by Secunia Research, so I approached this sotware with some skepticism. As with the other archive utilities in this section, Filzip is functional but flawed. For example, Filzip's encryption/decryption is often totally misleading. If you encrypt a file with a password and then attempt to decrypt the resulting file with the wrong password or even no password at all, Filzip always reports that "1 of 1 files have been successfully decrypted" even though you cannot open the resulting zip file. Fortunately, if you then decrypt with the correct password, you can in fact open the resulting zip file. One other puzzling flaw: Filzip's context menu for existing archive files does not include an "Open with Filzip" option. Instead, you must resort to the separate Windows "open with" context menu entry. These shortcomings aside, Filzip is as easy to use as any program in this group, and it has the full range of features that users would expect from any good archive program, including the capability to process rar files. [Added 14 November 2010]

• IZArc offers a good selection of alternatives in password/encryption for new files. Unfortunately, while IZArc can encrypt existing files, users cannot select any alternatives, and it is not apparent what algorithm the IZArc uses by default. Otherwise, creating a self-extracting executable file; splitting large files into multiple smaller files; and adding archive comments are as easy to accomplish in IZArc as in any of the other four competitors.

• PeaZip has no archive comment capability, and its context menu entries clog the main menu rather than appear in a cascading sub-menu. I also found its menu system and toolbar icons to be less intuitive than the other programs.

• TugZip's menu system and tool bar icons are not always intuitive. Users cannot encrypt or split existing archives: encryption and file splitting work only when creating new archives. By comparison, creating a self-extracting archive and adding archive comments in TugZip are relatively easy. [Added 19 October 2010]

• ZipGenius is by far the slowest of the six programs under discussion, both initially loading a file and then in performing subsequent tasks once the archive is loaded. Furthermore, of the four encryption methods available, the one called CryptoZip 2.0 never worked. It created an encrypted file that could never be re-opened even with the selected encryption key. Beyond those two flaws, ZipGenius performs all four ancillary tasks (file splitting, self-extracting executable, encryption, and comments) with comparative ease. [Added 19 October 2010]

In short, all six programs have one or more significant imperfections. Thus, while all six are highly serviceable, no one program stands out from the others. Recall the old adage about economists that says if your were to put six economists in a room, you will come away with seven different opinions. If you were to ask me to recommend just one of these six archive programs, it would depend on the time of day and the phase of the moon for me to produce one of seven different answers.

My indecisiveness becomes even more pronounced when taking into account each program's performance on the Windows 7 operating system, especially the 64-bit version featured on my new laptop. At least three factors seem to determine how a program performs in a 64-bit Windows environment:

On my 64-bit Windows 7 computer, the basic functionality remained intact for all six programs, but all too often the context menus disappeared, making it more difficult for users to access those programs. Context menus for 7-Zip, Filzip, and TugZip worked fine with my 32-bit file managers but disappeared when invoked by Windows Explorer (64-bit). Conversely, IZArc was the only program whose context menus worked in Windows Explorer (64-bit), but the context menus failed miserably with my 32-bit file managers. ZipGenius was an equal opportunity program: its context menus failed in both 32-bit and 64-bit file managers. Be advised, however, that there is a beta test version of a 64-bit add-on for ZipGenius that is intended to restore the context menus. However, that add-on is clearly not yet ready for prime time: it lists 10 context menu entries, but it displays the meaningless phrase "-NOKEY-" in each entry. We might hold out a glimmer of hope that the ZipGenius's author will some day correct this glitch, but for now, ZipGenius's context menus remain useless. And I did not bother to test PeaZip because even when it works, I do not like PeaZip's practice of cluttering up the main context menu instead of utilizing a sub-menu. On the plus side, PeaZip's plentiful "Send To" menu choices still remain a viable option with my 32-bit file managers and with 64-bit Windows Explorer.

To my way of thinking, these results only help to muddy the waters even further. Any one of the six programs will probably suffice to satisfy your basic needs, but in my humble opinion, no single clear-cut winner has emerged from among these six programs.

It is now time to pick on economists once again. I am reminded of the age-old question that asks: if you laid all of the economists in the country end-to-end, how far would they reach? The answer, of course, is that nobody knows, but the one remaining certainty is that they still would not reach a conclusion. I am only offering this information so that you, dear reader, might surpass those economists and myself by ultimately reaching your own conclusion.