.Exe vs .Zip Programs

**MilesAhead** · 17 Oct 2009, 02:32 PM

Usually if it has an installer it's because it makes file associations, uses settings in the Registry, or puts shortcuts in the start menu or quick launch or desktop or whatever. More and more people want to run "portable" programs that can run off a USB Key. Registry settings and that won't usually work because you don't know for sure what drive letter the USB key will have when it comes up.

There are programs to make the file associations without using the registry or just one key in the registry as an "anchor" to tell it how to find all the other info.

Also many times programs that come in a zip file with no installer just means it keeps its settings in an .ini file in the folder where you unpack the zip.

See this program for managing file associations for portable apps:

FileTypesMan - Alternative to File Types manager of Windows

http://www.nirsoft.net/utils/file_types_manager.html

FileTypesMan is a freeware tool that allows you to view and edit the file types and extensions of Windows operating system.

**gonwk** · 17 Oct 2009, 02:41 PM

Hi Miles,

GREAT Explanation ... Thanks.

Q1: So, which one is "Better" to use ... "Safer" to my PC ... the .EXE or .ZIP!?!?

For example AVS2DVD program comes in .EXE and .ZIP (A Self-contained) folder ... so is there a BENEFIT to using one over the other!?!?

Yesterday I downloaded and used the Zipped version ... and it works just fine ... it asked for AviSynth and ImgBurn ... since I am doing a Fresh Install of my OS on my laptop since I had all the crazy CPU and RAM usage hikes.

So, I am thinking may be Zipped version might be Safer if it does not mess up with too many of my Rgistry entries ... but then again someone told me that just because it is a Zipped version Unless is truly Portablish ... it still will write to my Registry ... So ...

Q2: Which version do YOU prefer & use!?!?

Thanks,

G!

**MilesAhead** · 17 Oct 2009, 05:11 PM

I don't think any generality applies. It will vary with each program.

**doctorhardware** · 17 Oct 2009, 05:42 PM

Usually though the exe directly installs the program where as the zip file has to be uncompressed and them install the program. So if there is a problem with the program both the zip and the exe can mess up the registry equally.

**soup** · 18 Oct 2009, 07:47 AM

I have to admit most of the time I will take the .exe over the zip, download, then install. No particular reason other than habit. If somebody wants to mess people up, they can do it with either one.

**gonwk** · 18 Oct 2009, 08:31 AM

Originally Posted by MilesAhead

I don't think any generality applies. It will vary with each program.

Hi Miles ... Either you are a Lawyer now or U were one in your other life ... So, in General which one do you prefer!?!?

@ DoctorHardware ... Hi Doc ... the Zipped version that I am talking about is not so I can unzip and then install ... but the "Zipped" version that acts as a "Portabelish" application ... meaning I can take that Zipped folder and move it around my C: drive and it still works ... and also I can have Several different Versions of the same program if I want to play around and compare the different versions.

I am ASSUMING (my assumptions might be totally WRONG since me no Techie) if I use Zipped Folder ...

1) I might not have to worry about "loose" Registry entries due to Install and Uninstall of the same program each time there is an update.

2) I might not cause their associated Codecs to conflict with many other Converter Programs and what not that I usually install on my laptop.

So, what is you folks input to my above #1 and #2 assumptions.

Thanks,

G!

**MilesAhead** · 18 Oct 2009, 12:45 PM

Originally Posted by gonwk

Hi Miles ... Either you are a Lawyer now or U were one in your other life ... So, in General which one do you prefer!?!?

I think we did this go round about 2 months ago. I don't see any reason to change my answer. Nothing new that I've found out.

**doctorhardware** · 18 Oct 2009, 12:48 PM

Ok I understand.

**MilesAhead** · 19 Oct 2009, 04:14 PM

Originally Posted by soup

I have to admit most of the time I will take the .exe over the zip, download, then install. No particular reason other than habit. If somebody wants to mess people up, they can do it with either one.

I think the most interesting thing that happened to me so far with this installable vs portable thing, is Burrrn CD burner app. I had been using the installable version for quite some time and it runs perfectly on XP. But in Vista the log output for some reason would produce double lines.. like
"processing track 4"
"processing track 4"

Just because of the portable fad, I downloaded the portable version. The bug was gone. Could be the programmer fixed it when updating it to be portable and never bothered to put the fix in the change log. Anyway, that was a pleasant surprise. In that particular case I definitely recommend the portable version on Vista and later.

**dr_ml422** · 31 Oct 2009, 05:15 PM

Fwiw, I'm using more portable apps. now than ever. Just plug in USB drive and run it from there. I use Ccleaner, Revo Uninstaller, and even ran Auslogic's defrag. Anything to not mess w/registry is better imo. Pretty soon a OS is coming in portable, and that should really be something.

**MilesAhead** · 1 Nov 2009, 05:33 AM

Originally Posted by dr_ml422

Fwiw, I'm using more portable apps. now than ever. Just plug in USB drive and run it from there. I use Ccleaner, Revo Uninstaller, and even ran Auslogic's defrag. Anything to not mess w/registry is better imo. Pretty soon a OS is coming in portable, and that should really be something.

I seem to remember xml configuration files were supposed to rescue us from the registry. Of course by the time they thought of that there were thousands of Windows apps depending on Registry settings so there's no way to get rid of it. It's like the answer to dll hell will be on there, but so will the dlls. To many apps to take them away.

**dr_ml422** · 2 Dec 2009, 04:11 PM

Originally Posted by MilesAhead

I think the most interesting thing that happened to me so far with this installable vs portable thing, is Burrrn CD burner app. I had been using the installable version for quite some time and it runs perfectly on XP. But in Vista the log output for some reason would produce double lines.. like
"processing track 4"
"processing track 4"

Just because of the portable fad, I downloaded the portable version. The bug was gone. Could be the programmer fixed it when updating it to be portable and never bothered to put the fix in the change log. Anyway, that was a pleasant surprise. In that particular case I definitely recommend the portable version on Vista and later.

I also have used Burrrn in the past and it's pretty good aside some burners that will act up as always. I will have to see if the portable is 7 x64 ready. I'm so use to ImgBurn though that the need for another burning app. has been few if almost not needed. Ever since the read mode was updated, and the .cue introduced it pretty much solves all my burning needs. I do however need c-dex to convert audio to mp3 so I could edit what I want and then either burn as is or convert back to audio files w/ImgBurn.

CopyToDVD comes in handy once in a while w/it's audio function, especially the Blind Write which will produce a exact Audio CD.

**PurpleDemon** · 2 Dec 2009, 05:00 PM

Hi G!
Your topic reminded of when I was in my hotmail account.

You can not e-mail an .exe file, but if you zipped it you can

.Exe vs .Zip Programs

.Exe vs .Zip Programs

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment