Gameguru Mania Updated:09:21 PM CEST Sep,21
66 lottery login

91 club

okwin

bdg game

55 club

Playbonus.ca
CONTACT
Please e-mail us if you have news.

(c) 1998-2025 Gameguru Mania
Privacy Policy statement
SEARCH:
 Gameguru Mania News - Dec,30 2014 -  
GOG.com on RAR vs DRM - briefly
(hx) 08:11 PM CET - Dec,30 2014 - Post a comment / read (27)
A thread on GOG.com discusses a recent change to the installers the online marketplace provides for the games it sells that's causing problems for some users. At issue is the use of password-protected compressed RAR files that cannot be opened by the innoextract utility favored by many Linux users. Makes me wonder why they didn't use 7zip instead with it being open source.
I use innoextract (http://constexpr.org/innoextract/) to extract Windows GOG installers on my Linux gaming rig. But a change has come here: newest installers use RAR archiving (the .bin is a RAR archive), that innoextract can't extract. I tried extracting directly the .bin, but it is password-protected.
There's a post from GOG.com explaining their reasoning:
Hello,

-Rars are used for convenience, as they have some features that the old archives lack. For example when making a test build of the game, it's faster for us to update the archives than to repack them from scratch when making small changes for testers.

-Watermarking the installers with username is not planned. One, for ideological reasons, two it's not really technologically feasible.

-Yes, the archives are password-protected. Here's why:

The supported way of installing the games is by using the Installer, which apart from unpacking the files, also creates registry entries, shortcuts, compatibility fixes etc. We want to avoid having the situation, when user will see a unprotected rar file, download and unpack it, and get a "broken" installation, because he didn't use the installer.
There were situations, when users would download just a single part of the installer, or try to unrar it manually (because apparently some browsers detect our new archives as rar files), or even try to open the .bin files with the VLC Video Player.
In such a situation I think it's better to give immediate "it won't work that way" message, rather than allow someone to make a "partial" installation, which may or may not work, without any information.

Another reason - I want to avoid the situation where someone tampers with the archives (let's say adding malware, or some illegal content), and uploads the modified version on torrents. I don't want the GOG Installer installing anything else than it was supposed to, and it doesn't matter how it was obtained.

The Installer is designed mostly for reliability and ease of use for any user. And it's intentionally designed as it is.

Mind you - if you are using the supported installation mode, you don't have to enter the password anywhere. Nor is it in any way dependent on username, or hardware, or anything else. It's more or less hardcoded into the installer (I see you guys already figured out how), as much as the decompression algorithm. You can still use the installer exactly as you could since the beginning of GOG, and install your games wherever, whenever, and however many times you want. It doesn't detect where was it downloaded from either. That hasn't changed at all.

We don't really support installing the game by manually unpacking the archives (for whatever reason you do that). On the other hand, I see you already figured out the algorithm for obtaining the password, so you are still able to do as much. I'm not going to say "Hey, good job hacking into our software guys!", but I'm not going to try and make the password harder either.
last 10 comments:
Csimbi(11:36 PM CET - Dec,30 2014 )
I do not get this.

gx-x(01:49 AM CET - Dec,31 2014 )
@Csimbi: There are people that have "Linux gaming rigs" and RAR is not supported on Linux, or it's not free or idk. Anyway, it's absurd, Linux gaming rig...what does it run via windows emulation? Worms Armagedon? It's silly.

Csimbi(09:44 AM CET - Dec,31 2014 )
Hmmm. Interesting.
I guess it's a problem with Wine then? (rather than GOG or RAR?)

Tom(07:03 PM CET - Dec,31 2014 )
There is nothing wrong here or complicated. Just the daft user.

Csimbi(07:06 PM CET - Dec,31 2014 )
Ain't that always the case? ;-)

gx-x(07:43 PM CET - Dec,31 2014 )
Tom> There is nothing wrong here or complicated. Just the daft user.

apparently, there are many of those using linux, feeling "smarter" than to use Windows for games.
I had a look at he games supported by wine and cross**** (whatever) and Diablo 2 is pretty much the best game you are going to get, save for games that have been ported for linux by developers themselves.

I think you will have a better gaming experience on a tablet.

Tom(12:13 AM CET - Jan,01 2015 )
gx-x>
I think you will have a better gaming experience on a tablet.

Probably, my hope is with Steam box linux will become more viable. Probably in a couple of years. Something to hope for.

Apathy Curve(08:33 AM CET - Jan,01 2015 )
Linux gamers are a subset of a subset of computer users. As such, their sense of entitlement is swollen beyond all reason.

Csimbi(12:11 PM CET - Jan,01 2015 )
Apathy Curve> Linux gamers are a subset of a subset of computer users. As such, their sense of entitlement is swollen beyond all reason.
Apple (MacInDos) users are also Linux-based, aren't they?

amra(10:24 PM CET - Jan,01 2015 )
This is what ubuntu makes out of linux. ^^
Yeah there is such a big growd using winzip or other crap instead of 7zip, I do not know why this is...
But for rar, there is rar support on linux but best on console, so if you are a GUI user (either Win or Lin) then you just loose.

gx-x(10:59 PM CET - Jan,01 2015 )
amra> This is what ubuntu makes out of linux. ^^
Yeah there is such a big growd using winzip or other crap instead of 7zip, I do not know why this is...
But for rar, there is rar support on linux but best on console, so if you are a GUI user (either Win or Lin) then you just loose.

while you may be able to use console and call us GUI users being at a loss, you should know that winzip was made in 1991, and 7zip was made in 1999. There is also the fact that only 1 in in 1000 home PCs is running linux so the answer to your question is: 7zip isn't used because people are used to WinZip and WinRar that were developed before 7zip. And 7zip isn't really always compatible across the board, and is basically inferior to WinRar so people on windows (a lot of them) just prefer WinRar these days.

amra(12:35 AM CET - Jan,03 2015 )
Sorry if I sounded rude.
I used arj, ace, rar, winzip, and after 7zip came out I never looked back (on windows). Since 7zip is opensource and free I prefer it over winrar or other software I have to buy.
On linux I use tar.gz or such, which can be opened on win with 7zip... never had probs, but yeah I'm a specific user, not opening very much crossplatform archives or games from GOG on linux.

I would not call GUI users being at a loss all the time, different people different tastes, but I know people refusing a terminal just for the cause.
These guys should not complain. We all started small and google knows lot. :)

gx-x(01:51 AM CET - Jan,03 2015 )
Well, winzip was opensource shareware, so was winrar, they were free for non-commercial use for a long time. Today, you just warez it and you are done. Most things are packed with rar and 7zip often is not able to unpack some of the archives.
yes, I am telling you to warez a software that should be free and was free for non-commercial use.

amra(03:38 AM CET - Jan,04 2015 )
I only remember nagscreens. ;P
And I'm sorry... to me it makes no sense to warez a software when a similar one does the job for free. I'm a lazy jerk, warezing is too much fuzz for me.
Every new version the same crap, I'm done with that (99% ;).
But yeah I rarely have any kind of rar archives crossing my lines, maybe because of exactly that. And then 7zip always did its job.

If winrar would be opensource and free like 7zip... totally yes... why not see again, which finishes the tests best.

There is just a difference of all day habits on programs we got used to for various reasons. ;)

gx-x(08:15 AM CET - Jan,04 2015 )
amra> I only remember nagscreens. ;P
And I'm sorry... to me it makes no sense to warez a software when a similar one does the job for free. I'm a lazy jerk, warezing is too much fuzz for me.
Every new version the same crap, I'm done with that (99% ;).
But yeah I rarely have any kind of rar archives crossing my lines, maybe because of exactly that. And then 7zip always did its job.

If winrar would be opensource and free like 7zip... totally yes... why not see again, which finishes the tests best.

There is just a difference of all day habits on programs we got used to for various reasons. ;)

I have 7zip installed installed, it's not bad at all but I run into issues with some archives from time to time so I don't really use it.

As for speed, I really don't care, I have i5 @3.8GHz, it takes ~10 seconds to unpack a 4GB with winRAR, I am pretty sure that even if there are faster apps, it wouldn't make much of a difference.

Csimbi(04:31 PM CET - Jan,04 2015 )
gx-x> amra> I only remember nagscreens. ;P
And I'm sorry... to me it makes no sense to warez a software when a similar one does the job for free. I'm a lazy jerk, warezing is too much fuzz for me.
Every new version the same crap, I'm done with that (99% ;).
But yeah I rarely have any kind of rar archives crossing my lines, maybe because of exactly that. And then 7zip always did its job.

If winrar would be opensource and free like 7zip... totally yes... why not see again, which finishes the tests best.

There is just a difference of all day habits on programs we got used to for various reasons. ;)

I have 7zip installed installed, it's not bad at all but I run into issues with some archives from time to time so I don't really use it.

As for speed, I really don't care, I have i5 @3.8GHz, it takes ~10 seconds to unpack a 4GB with winRAR, I am pretty sure that even if there are faster apps, it wouldn't make much of a difference.
Actually, unpacking requires very little processor speed. It needs a fast disk (SSD) and possibly a lot of RAM for write caching.

heretic(04:53 PM CET - Jan,04 2015 )

gx-x(04:57 PM CET - Jan,04 2015 )
Csimbi> gx-x> amra> I only remember nagscreens. ;P
And I'm sorry... to me it makes no sense to warez a software when a similar one does the job for free. I'm a lazy jerk, warezing is too much fuzz for me.
Every new version the same crap, I'm done with that (99% ;).
But yeah I rarely have any kind of rar archives crossing my lines, maybe because of exactly that. And then 7zip always did its job.

If winrar would be opensource and free like 7zip... totally yes... why not see again, which finishes the tests best.

There is just a difference of all day habits on programs we got used to for various reasons. ;)

I have 7zip installed installed, it's not bad at all but I run into issues with some archives from time to time so I don't really use it.

As for speed, I really don't care, I have i5 @3.8GHz, it takes ~10 seconds to unpack a 4GB with winRAR, I am pretty sure that even if there are faster apps, it wouldn't make much of a difference.
Actually, unpacking requires very little processor speed. It needs a fast disk (SSD) and possibly a lot of RAM for write caching.

Of course it depends on the disk/drive, but the whole algorithm is run on CPU and then transferred from memory to permanent storage.

as you can see here for example: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/fx-4170-core-i3-3220-benchmarks,3314-5.html

there are differences even between packers (winzip being the worst) so it's not just speed of your storage device. Also, try "StuffIt" (there is a trial version), it's probably the best compression ratio out there but it takes a lot of time and it's very CPU demanding.

PS. in winRAR benchmark (it's not using memory as storage) my i3 is getting around 3MB/s and i5 is getting 4.5MB/s so SSD would be a total overkill with it's 400MB/s potential. CPU [u:edd66d72e4]does[/u:edd66d72e4] play a big role in unpacking, try it for yourself.
You could have some archives that were created just for the sake of splitting files into smaller pieces that use no compression at all, in that case, yes, SSD will come into play over a regular HDD. IF you are unpacking or packing something and using best compression, then it won't matter much.

Csimbi(11:50 PM CET - Jan,04 2015 )
You said 'unpacking' not 'packing'.
Packing is processor-intensive, yes. In addition, packing benefits well from CL7 RAMs, so a slower processor can beat a faster one in this game if the faster processor has slower RAM (CL9 or more).

gx-x(12:02 AM CET - Jan,05 2015 )
Csimbi> You said 'unpacking' not 'packing'.
Packing is processor-intensive, yes. In addition, packing benefits well from CL7 RAMs, so a slower processor can beat a faster one in this game if the faster processor has slower RAM (CL9 or more).

unpacking also needs CPU, if it didn't It would not take ~2-3 minutes to unpack ~4GB it would take 10-15 seconds with SSD, but it doesn't.

PS. I tried to find unpacking benchs but I couldn't find any.

Csimbi(09:15 AM CET - Jan,05 2015 )
gx-x> Csimbi> You said 'unpacking' not 'packing'.
Packing is processor-intensive, yes. In addition, packing benefits well from CL7 RAMs, so a slower processor can beat a faster one in this game if the faster processor has slower RAM (CL9 or more).

unpacking also needs CPU, if it didn't It would not take ~2-3 minutes to unpack ~4GB it would take 10-15 seconds with SSD, but it doesn't.

PS. I tried to find unpacking benchs but I couldn't find any.
It does. But only a fraction (2-3%).

gx-x(09:42 AM CET - Jan,05 2015 )
Csimbi> gx-x> Csimbi> You said 'unpacking' not 'packing'.
Packing is processor-intensive, yes. In addition, packing benefits well from CL7 RAMs, so a slower processor can beat a faster one in this game if the faster processor has slower RAM (CL9 or more).

unpacking also needs CPU, if it didn't It would not take ~2-3 minutes to unpack ~4GB it would take 10-15 seconds with SSD, but it doesn't.

PS. I tried to find unpacking benchs but I couldn't find any.
It does. But only a fraction (2-3%).

I have to illustrate this so her it goes:

1.Barton 3200 unpacking 4GB to SSD

2. i3 or amd 8xxx unpacking to SSD

would there be difference?

...

Csimbi(06:57 PM CET - Jan,05 2015 )
No, there would not be.
Both of those CPUs are too fast the SSD's read/write speeds.
You'd need to read and write at least 1Gbytes/sec (or even more) for those CPUs to even "feel" it.
See it for yourself.
Open the task manager and watch the CPUs while you are unpacking.

gx-x(07:44 PM CET - Jan,05 2015 )
Csimbi> No, there would not be.
Both of those CPUs are too fast the SSD's read/write speeds.
You'd need to read and write at least 1Gbytes/sec (or even more) for those CPUs to even "feel" it.
See it for yourself.
Open the task manager and watch the CPUs while you are unpacking.

well then, here is food for thought for you:







...as you can see, there is quite obviously a difference between CPUs while EXTRACTING. ;)


As for usage, I just extracted a 18GB game from rar, usage was on average 22% on i5 on all cores, with spikes to ~50% (probably something else caused them), it took ~7 minutes.

I can definitely notice a speed improvement over i3. I say this because I watch episodes of series and I watch them from RARs directly (temporary unpacking) and they unpack faster by some 20% I'd say. It's faster enough for me to notice.

Csimbi(12:51 AM CET - Jan,06 2015 )
I'd think that those include cache management and I/O - not the actual CPU power consumed by WinRAR.

gx-x(01:09 AM CET - Jan,06 2015 )
Csimbi> I'd think that those include cache management and I/O - not the actual CPU power consumed by WinRAR.

meaning what? It shows that faster and newer CPUs extract faster, it doesn't matter how, we are not discussing power and I/O here. Here, one more test, shows time in seconds:



My claim was that CPU makes difference in extraction time and it matters, it still needs to do the work. It's not a high load work, granted, but the efficiency of the CPU matters. Most of these don't even reach the full HDD speeds during extraction so SSD would be irrelevant. Some of these reviewers even used RAM Disk for the test. I think it's from this last one, not sure.

Csimbi(09:55 AM CET - Jan,06 2015 )
Sure. Faster CPUs allow for faster I/O.

All comments
 Add your comment (free registration required)


Related news:
GOG and game publishers launch FreedomToBuy.games - 13 games are now available for free - freegame (Aug 01 2025)
FREE Warhammer 40,000: Rites of War on GOG for a limited time - freegame (May 22 2025)
Breath of Fire IV now available via GOG - briefly (Apr 26 2025)
Metro 2033 Redux is FREE to keep on Steam, GOG & Xbox - freegame (Apr 14 2025)
Amerzone: The Explorer's Legacy (1999) is FREE to keep on Steam and GOG for a limited time - freegame (Mar 22 2025)
GOG's Preservation Program gains 27 more classic games including FEAR and Silent Hill 4 - briefly (Mar 21 2025)
FREE Dying Light 10th Anniversary Bundle on Steam, GOG & Epic - for a limited time only! - freegame (Jan 28 2025)
HuniePop is free on Steam and GOG for the next 24h - freegame (Jan 20 2025)
Vambrace: Cold Soul free to keep on GOG - freegame (Dec 31 2024)
The Dark Eye: Chains of Satinav free to keep on GOG - freegame (Dec 28 2024)
FREE Diggles: The Myth of Fenris on GOG - freegame (Nov 15 2024)
GOG Preservation Program announced - briefly (Nov 13 2024)
Halloween giveaway on GOG - Return of the Phantom - freegame (Oct 31 2024)
Original Resident Evil 3 coming to GOG on September 25 - briefly (Sep 23 2024)
Tropico 4 giveaway on GOG.com - freegame (Aug 27 2024)
Original Resident Evil 2 coming to GOG on August 27 - briefly (Aug 19 2024)
The First Templar - Special Edition is free to keep on GOG - freegame (Jul 03 2024)
Original Resident Evil now available via GOG - briefly (Jun 26 2024)
FREE Shadows: Awakening on GOG for a limited time - freegame (Jun 21 2024)
Hammerting on GOG for a limited time - freegame (Mar 29 2024)
Book of Demons is currently free to claim on GOG - freegame (Mar 23 2024)
Alpha Protocol for PC returns via GOG - briefly (Mar 20 2024)
God of War is now available DRM-free from GOG store - briefly (Mar 13 2024)
FREE South of the Circle on GOG - freegame (Dec 29 2023)
GoG.com is offering Amnesia: A Machine For Pigs for free to keep until June 9 - freegame (Jun 07 2023)
FREE Narita Boy on GOG.com - freegame (Nov 24 2022)
Immortal Redneck FREE on GOG - freegame (Sep 03 2022)
Get Lovecraft's Untold Stories for free at GOG - freegame (Aug 30 2022)
Get a free copy of cyberpunk RPG Dex in The GOG Sale - freegame (Aug 26 2022)
STASIS is free to keep on GOG.com - freegame (Aug 22 2022)
Get VirtuaVerse for Free on GOG - freegame (Jun 24 2022)
Flashback remastered is free to keep on GOG - freegame (Jun 20 2022)
Venetica Gold Edition - Free To Keep @ GOG - freegame (Jun 10 2022)
Thea 2: The Shattering is free on GOG.com - freegame (Mar 30 2022)
Outcast 1.1 is currently available for free on GOG - freegame (Nov 08 2021)
Quake II RTX on GOG.com for free - freegame (Aug 19 2021)
Vesper Out Now on Steam & GOG.com - movie (Aug 02 2021)
Giveaway: Syberia I & II pack - GOG.com - freegame (Jul 14 2021)
The original XIII (2003) is free on GOG now! (limited time offer) - freegame (Mar 30 2021)
Metro: Last Light Redux is free on GOG now - freegame (Dec 30 2020)
GOG won't sell horror game banned in China - briefly (Dec 17 2020)
GOG Winter Sale launched - briefly (Dec 16 2020)
Devotion relaunches via GOG on December 18 - briefly (Dec 16 2020)
GOG.com Black Friday Sale - briefly (Nov 27 2020)
MechWarrior 5: Mercenaries coming to Xbox Series, Xbox One, Steam, GOG - briefly (Nov 26 2020)
Silent Hill 4: The Room for PC now available via GOG - briefly (Oct 02 2020)
GOG GALAXY Store Adding Multi-Service Store - briefly (Oct 01 2020)
Freedom Fighters on GOG.com - briefly (Sep 22 2020)
Serious Sam: The First Encounter is free to own on GOG - freegame (Aug 24 2020)
Epic Games Store has officially integrated into GOG Galaxy 2.0 - briefly (Jul 21 2020)

related cheats/trainer:

NoX v1.2 (GOG.com) [trainer +6]


 External links