You sure about that? I’ve decompressed huge files, some time ago, using a 3.5” HDD and if it were like that, it would take much longer than needed because of that overlay you talk about.
I didn’t downvoted your post, I just made a genuine question, since I’ve never noticed that.
I’m just sceptic on what you mentioned. Whenever I have some free time, I’ll try to do a deep test on that one!
Edit: No need to do a test, since I never use drag n drop (like mentioned on another comment), my test would always show the same outcome as WinRAR.
You sure about that? I’ve decompressed huge files, some time ago, using a 3.5” HDD and if it were like that, it would take much longer than needed because of that overlay you talk about.
And it took the same time as WinRar (͡•_ ͡• )
Downvote all you want, but you can configure WinRAR to decompress directly to source.
I had TB files and just no space to have both a copy and the result, IIRC the speed was also obviously better without copying.
I didn’t downvoted your post, I just made a genuine question, since I’ve never noticed that. I’m just sceptic on what you mentioned.
Whenever I have some free time, I’ll try to do a deep test on that one!Edit: No need to do a test, since I never use drag n drop (like mentioned on another comment), my test would always show the same outcome as WinRAR.