Talk:KGB Archiver

This article was nominated for deletion on 24 April 2010 (UTC). The result of the discussion was Nomination withdrawn.

This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Computing: Software

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Software.
	This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool as Stub-class because it uses a stub template. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the `\|auto=` parameter.

KGB is basically a PAQ6 clone. In fact KGB is PAQ6v2 with a GUI created on top of it. Unfortunately the author of KGB doesn't respect the GPL license of PAQ6 (see http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/PAQ).

Should we remove KGB Archiver from Wiki as it clearly violated the GPL?.

No. Renegadeviking 2:52PM 10/11/06

I used 1.2.1.24 and it is under GPL, so as for I can see there should be no license issues.

First, Neither you using KGB Archiver or KJB claiming to be under GPL says anything about whether KGB Archiver violates the GPL. Second, the article on PAQ has no citation establishing that KGB Archiver violates the GPL. Third, you don't delete an article to punish someone for alleged GPL violations. You document the violation from a reputable source and put it in the article. 72.251.90.20 (talk) 09:15, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

PAQ8 KGB Archiver?

Is there a graphical front end for PAQ8 yet? Renegadeviking 2:52PM 10/11/06

PeaZip is a graphical frontend for Matt Mahoney's PAQ8F and Bill Pettis's PAQ8JD; you can create, browse and extract archives in those two PAQ8 formats. The original PAQ executables used doesn't support additional features, like encryption (that is instead integrated in KGB Archiver), solid archiving or volume spanning, which however you can perform in a second pass using another PeaZip supported format with those features, like split, PEA or 7Z.

THE BEST COMPRESSION TOOL EVER! -- Walt e r Humala - Emperor of West Wikipedia|wanna Talk? 02:49, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know is KGB Archiver PAQ spinoff or not, but I find it very useful tool and I think Wikipedia should have article about it. Imagine if many years ago Wikipedia have deleted article about Winamp or DC++ because of lack of notability. Lets wait and see how KGB Archiver develops. DasReboot (talk) 21:01, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Wikipedia is not a crystal ball, and editors should avoid using one when commenting in a deletion discussion. It is difficult to determine precisely what people believe in the present, even more difficult to predict how perceptions will change in the future, and completely unnecessary to even try. Notability is based on objective evidence of whether sufficient reliable sources have taken notice already, not on subjective judgments of whether people should take notice in the future. Focusing on the objective evidence helps the deletion discussion reach a logical conclusion; injecting your personal predictions does not."

Source: http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:Arguments_to_avoid_in_deletion_discussions#Crystal_ball 72.251.90.20 (talk) 09:15, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete

Abandoned, not notable, buggy, not useful. 84.75.167.143 (talk) 09:28, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Abandoned, buggy, and not useful are not reasons for deletion. MS-DOS is abandoned. WinME is buggy. May programs are not useful to many people.

Not being notable is reason for deletion, and KGB Archiver is not notable. It is not included in most "test all archivers against each other" websites, and if it really is based upon PAQ version 6, the world has moved on to using PAQ version 8. Delete it. 72.251.90.20 (talk) 09:15, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It is, however, one Hell of a compression archiver! I'm thinking of buying a Mac Pro, Boot Camping it to Windows 7 Ultimate, and maxxing out the RAM, just to run KGB non-stop for my petabytes of data that I need to backup. One experiment took a 1.1 MB file and compressed it to 101 KB. That's great! (I used Digital 8 tape backup from Coolatoola to hold 17 GB per tape.) Still, my personal expriences have nothing to do with the article, and I suggest that, other than ZIP, RAR, SIT, and a few other mainstream compression formats, or maybe all compression formats, should be rewritten in a very long, but accurate, article. Just a thought. Apple8800 (talk) 16:58, 26 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on KGB Archiver. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100522074017/http://cshared.com/compress-1-gb-to-10-mb-kgb-archiver/ to http://cshared.com/compress-1-gb-to-10-mb-kgb-archiver/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:54, 4 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]