2.1 is more stable.
Pros: I've upgraded to version 2.1 from Zipeg website (because I also upgraded my Mac from Tiger to Leopard) and it seems to be much more stable than 2.0.
Posted: 29-Dec-2007 11:19:11 AM
Sort by:
Review score
[?]
|
Date
Positive Rating
|
Negative Rating
Pros: I've upgraded to version 2.1 from Zipeg website (because I also upgraded my Mac from Tiger to Leopard) and it seems to be much more stable than 2.0.
Posted: 29-Dec-2007 11:19:11 AM
Was this review helpful?
1 of 1 users
found this review helpful.
Offensive:
Does this post contain offensive content?
Flag it for our review.
Replies:
No replies
› Reply to this review
Pros: I've upgraded to Leopard and I do frequently unpack encrypted/password protected RAR files. Zipeg did excellent job on Tiger but on Leopard it had few minor annoyances. However it seems to be fixed in Zipeg 2.1 which is up and running on Zipeg website. Hope it will appear here soon.
Posted: 29-Dec-2007 11:17:27 AM
Was this review helpful?
Offensive:
Does this post contain offensive content?
Flag it for our review.
Replies:
No replies
› Reply to this review
Pros: I started to use it on my Mac because there is no WinZip for OSX yet. It is way better than SuffIt and also free.
Posted: 05-Nov-2007 03:03:55 AM
Was this review helpful?
Offensive:
Does this post contain offensive content?
Flag it for our review.
Replies:
No replies
› Reply to this review
Pros: nothing
Cons: it does even less than StuffIt Expander. The archive ended up in ~/Library/OpenUp and is deleted when Open Up quits. Help / Supported Decompression Formats ... is disabled in version 3.2... try Zipeg instead...
Posted: 20-Sep-2007 04:03:14 AM
Was this review helpful?
Offensive:
Does this post contain offensive content?
Flag it for our review.
Replies:
No replies
› Reply to this review
Pros: on my Mac core duo I tried to open 90MB zip file. still opening... 100% cpu utilization. Looks like software is not working at all.
*****.
Posted: 12-Sep-2007 06:38:47 PM
Was this review helpful?
Offensive:
Does this post contain offensive content?
Flag it for our review.
Replies:
No replies
› Reply to this review
Sort by:
Review score
[?]
|
Date
Positive Rating
|
Negative Rating
| Ratings submitted: | 10 |
| Reviews written: | 9 |
| "Helpful" votes received: | 1 |
| "Not helpful" votes received: | 0 |