Talk:Zip (file format)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Computing / Software (Rated C-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon 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.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Software.

Zip64 applications[edit]

Looking for a section containing a list of applications that support ZIP64 format. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 15:56, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

Zipx file format[edit]

WinZip 12.1 introduces a new Zipx file format. According to the FAQ, it's using WinZip's advanced compression methods. Which ones? And what is "Legacy Zip 2.0" format? Please write about it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 12:38, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

The article already mentions .zipx, although it doesn't specify exactly which compression methods WinZip uses. As for "Legacy Zip 2.0", that just means the zip files that are normally used (with "deflate" compression) - it's a common tactic for proponents of new formats/protocols/etc. to refer to what everyone else uses as "legacy", to make it sound as though it's already obsolete. --Zundark (talk) 13:43, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

ZIP Format with Traditional PKZip Encryption[edit]

Would the image below be an adequate diagram of how encryption is structured? Look here —Preceding unsigned comment added by Randmname39 (talkcontribs) 02:55, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Origins section clean-up[edit]

I just tried to clean-up the origins section - it contains a lot of irrelevant information and is quite poorly written (and flagged for a clean-up too!). However, my edit was reverted as vandalism. I'm just trying to help here - please can someone explain how that information is relevant to an article on the zip file format? SmackEater (talk) 13:21, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

I have no comment on the quality of the edits, but my guess is that the person reverting you just noticed the removal of a large amount of text and assumed it was vandalism. The best thing to do at this point is to contact him/her (it's User:Vrenator) on his/her talk page and explain. Xe may then self-revert. Qwyrxian (talk) 13:24, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
Cool, I have just done that - I wasn't trying to vandalise the article, and was trying to improve the information here - If anyone else has some pointers on anything else in there that is relevant, please point them out! SmackEater (talk) 13:28, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
I wasa bit hasty in reverting - apologies for that. It showed up as a load of information being removed and unsourced information being added.I'm sure you and the other editors here know a lot more about the subject so I will keep out of it for now. Vrenator (talk) 13:31, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Possible sources of Gary Conway/IDC[edit]

I've just been looking for potential sources to show Gary Conway/IDC's contribution to the format, as there appear to be no citations for this at present. I've not had chance to investigate/write up fully, but here's some starting points:

I've not yet managed to find anything that isn't self-published.

--me_and 11:02, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

I've just removed references in the article to Gary Conway and IDC. I can find no sources for this information that aren't either self published or acknowledged citations of Wikipedia, while there are numerous sources that identify Phil Katz as the sole creator. If you wish to re-add content stating IDC and/or Gary Conway are also behind the format, please cite reliable and independent sources. me_and 21:12, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

I was a big fan of Gary's NARC file compression and file management program back in my Osborne-1 and Kaypro CP/M days,

I used to run a BBS called Land of Oz in Louisville KY in the 80's and followed Gary's development and working with Phil Katz back in the day.

I can assure you he had a major influence on the refinement of the ZIP format, and his program worked flawlessly.

I tried searching using the WWW Archibes WayBack machine for references, but most of this was Pre-Web and all in BBS forums, and I have no archives.

He also presented to the Louisville Kaypro users group frequently back in the day.

Curt Edwards LaGrange, KY PS: Not sure if I am putting this is the right place. (talk) 22:37, 22 October 2014 (UTC)


So should it be said that the Zip file format is lossless compression? I'm pretty sure it the old versions use DEFLATE... Jasonxu98 (talk) 20:34, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Not sure what you mean; deflate was introduced with PKZIP version 1.93a in the early 1990s, and is the current main method. Before that, there was shrinking, reducing, and imploding. All methods are lossless, in that you get out what was originally put in (if there is no error). AnonMoos (talk) 01:34, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Auto archive[edit]

Any objections to me setting up auto-archive on this page to clear out some of the old conversations? me_and 12:29, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

 Done, seeing no objections. —me_and 12:33, 9 November 2010 (UTC)


Any reason for the all-capping of ZIP? It isn't an acronym. Nor is it pronounced "zed eye pee". It isn't even a trademark. See

And usage seems evenly split between "zip file" and "zipfile" (from a Google search, separately for "zipfile" in quotes). As a single word seems preferable, since it's pronounced that way (a single stress) and since zip is not an adjective (you can't transform the phrase to "a file that is zip"). —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 13:26, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

In APPNOTE.TXT it's written as ZIP (or sometimes .ZIP). --Zundark (talk) 14:33, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
Under the 8.3 filename format of MS-DOS, all filenames and file extensions were always upper-case... AnonMoos (talk) 14:41, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
The word "Zip" appears as "Zip", "ZIP" and "zip" throughout its history, sometimes with a prepended "." – no form is authoritative. I suggest for editorial consistency one form should be picked ("Zip" probably), and used throughout the article. Alexbrn 13:07, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

is the posibility to learn about what is zip and zip files and folders in telugu language .[edit]

please give me the details of to learn about the zip files and folders and complete tutorials of zip from beginners lesson by video tutorials on telugu language . — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 08:14, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

Advantages and disadvantages section[edit]

I notice this has attracted a procon template. Reading the material in this section I see it is a rather rambling unsourced commentary, thus failing WP:OR. As a commentary I also note what is said is not specific to the Zip format, but could apply to most formats based on contiguous blocks of bytes. I propose removing this section entirely. Alexbrn 16:27, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

I agree here. Unless someone is willing to find some secondary research pertaining to, and write a decent section about, the pros and cons of specifically the Zip format, then it should go. Not only is it unsourced, but it doesn't really give any useful information and is poorly written. --EM64T (talk) 17:15, 16 November 2012 (UTC)
It makes sense if the two main formats you're considering are ".zip" and ".tgz" (or ".tar.gz"), and you want to know which is best for the job you want to do. But maybe such comparisons would be more suitable for another article... AnonMoos (talk) 00:56, 17 November 2012 (UTC)
Aha - okay, so perhaps adding something earlier like "Because files in a Zip archive are compressed individually it is possible to extract them, or add new ones, without applying compression or decompression to the entire archive. This contrasts with the format of compressed Tar files, for which such random-access processing is not easily possible." The first sentence could be sourced to some relevant descriptive section of the APPNOTE. ?? Alexbrn (talk) 13:10, 19 November 2012 (UTC)
 Done Alexbrn (talk) 14:46, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Error Correction?[edit]

In Implementation section, there is a line:

The Info-ZIP implementations also know how to use the error correction capabilities built into the zip compression format.

Where does it mentioned in Info-ZIP document? Roytam1 (talk) 06:35, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Revisit of "Should ZIP be in caps?" (now in archive 1)[edit]

First off, there is wide inconsistency as to the presentation of "zip" throughout the article so this needs to be rectified. Secondly, having come to the article looking for the correct presentation and finding said inconsistency, I contacted PKWARE, Inc. and received this response:

The original specification refers to our technology as “.ZIP”.  This is the generally acceptable reference so in context of a file the term would be a “.ZIP file”.
This is not trademarked so no symbol is required.
ZIP64 is a PKWARE trademark and should be labeled using “TM”.
Jeff Kazlo
Legal Administrator

I propose a change of nearly all instances of "zip" (in whatever form) to ".ZIP" and would like to make this change in a few days time. Grika 11:48, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

First off, the recent emerging practice is to mainly only capitalize abbreviations which are pronounced letter-by-letter ("UN", "USA", "UK", but "Nato", "radar", "laser", "Opec" etc.). This isn't quite the standard yet, but it's the current tendency. Of course, if referring to a highly technical term which is commonly presented in all-caps form in the technical literature, then it would be right to preserve this in the Wikipedia article; however, I'm not sure that "ZIP" qualifies for this. Consult also WP:MOS... AnonMoos (talk) 15:51, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
Well ".ZIP" is certainly commonly (almost exclusively) presented just so in PKWARE's technical literature. If the world at large preferred to use "ThreeM" instead of 3M, would that make it more correct than the company's corporate ID standards? Grika 20:02, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
PKWARE can call its software whatever it wants, but the file format is not entirely under its control... AnonMoos (talk) 02:16, 29 March 2013 (UTC)
Also, the first argument about abbreviations does not apply as .ZIP is not an abbreviation. "Zip" refers to speediness. Grika 13:04, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Combination with other file formats - incorrect reference to gzip?[edit]

... although some tools, for example gzip, will not process archive files that don't start with a file entry at offset zero.
What gzip has to do with zip archive format at all? It just shares (possibly) the same deflate algorithm, but file format and purposes are drastically different. -- 13:33, 31 May 2014 Granfalloner

Gzip is not meant to be generally Zip-compatible, but gunzip can decode some Zip files which contain only one compressed file in some circumstances... AnonMoos (talk) 00:37, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

Missing header field?[edit]

The specification lists a "version made by" field right before "version needed to extract", but this page only lists the latter.

Which is mistaken? — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 00:17, 13 July 2015 (UTC)


"Removed this as the ZIPX proprietary file format has nothing to do with the Zip file format. No other implementation besides the one from WinZip exists. Please break out references to ZIPX into it's own entry" from DanChoe

This is false. The file format is the same as a .zip file. It's just that newer compression methods are supported in the ZIP container and a new extension can be used for them.

"While it shares a similar name, ZIPX is proprietary to WinZip Co."

No, there are others like PKZIP and SecureZIP (created by PKWARE). [1] The compression methods are known. ZIPX is mentioned in APPNOTE.TXT: "Use of the extension .ZIPX is also recognized and MAY be used for ZIP files." I see the new compression methods in part "4.4.5 compression method: (2 bytes)" and in the details of wavpack you can read "5.9.1 Information describing the use of compression method 97 is provided by WinZIP International, LLC." Either way, it's very wrong not to mention anything of ZIPX on the page. --Ondertitel (talk) 22:23, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

^ Citing your source, "the compilers of this resource are not aware of any use of the .zipx extension for files created by tools other than WinZip". While it shares a similar name, ZIPX is proprietary to WinZip Co. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DanChoe (talkcontribs) 23:09, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

You keep repeating yourself to the point where you're ignoring everything I just said while providing no new arguments. You keep referring to [2] which has "Last significant FDD update: 2012-11-12" on the page. "ZIPX is proprietary to WinZip Co" you keep repeating but you never provided a source for this either. In my first message here is a link: (repeating it in full now) I'll even quote: Starting with verion 9, 7Zip supports opening and creating zipx files, so this is the first free solution to open ZIPX files (tested zipx with 7-zip v9.18/21 and both support this archiving format). Zipx support added in PKZIP and SecureZip. --Ondertitel (talk) 09:09, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

"Please stop abusing this page. This page is for the ZIP file format. ZIPX should not be listed in the filename extension." --

The official ZIP file format documentation (APPNOTE.TXT) is clear on this. It lists .zipx as an allowed extension and defines the compression methods in use on ZIPX. The file format is exactly the same. It just indicates that one of the newer compression algorithms is used for the data. The software made by the authors of the ZIP standard support ZIPX. There is open source software supporting the additional compression algorithms. A file format can have multiple extensions. e.g. .rar, .r00, .r01. It's not like .jar or .docx where the archived files themselves provide an additional format structure. Please discuss any of your concerns here first instead of reverting and claiming "abuse". --Ondertitel (talk) 16:31, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

@ Please read Wikipedia:Assume good faith and do not refer to other people's normal opinions as "abusing". Also, User:Ondertitel is right. Also, the only reason the .zipx filename extension was invented is because some versions of Windows have really awful ZIP file support built-in, that only supports Deflate and Store, and when Windows sees any other compression, it implies to the user that the file is corrupt. So ZIP files with bzip2 or later features are created with the extension .zipx so that at least Windows users know they need to download a program to open it, instead of being lied to by Windows. In response to some of DanChoe's "interesting" edit summaries and other claims:

  • There is no such thing as "WinZip Co." — that, by itself, is evidence that someone is not checking any sources and has no idea whether a specific organization is claiming anything to be proprietary.
  • WinZip's own website says that .zipx is just a .zip with specific compression methods. "Additional Compression Methods Specification". 3.1. April 14, 2014. Retrieved 2015-12-05. :

    The Zipx file is a Zip file that uses any of the aforementioned compression methods or the LZMA or bzip2 compression methods as documented in the Zip file appnote.txt specification. ... We believe that use of the free compression code and of this specification will make it easy for all developers to add compatible compression to their Zip file utilities.

    The same page then goes on to describe 4 more compression methods, three of which are labeled "open-source" right in the description. I seem to remember the JPEG Compression (method 96) was claimed as proprietary at one point, but none of them have the word "proprietary" or any other description that implies that they are proprietary now.
  • As for the edit summary "Please provide source where the ZIPX format is implemented by other parties outside of Winzip.": First, this edit, conveniently, removed the proof of the point above at the same time. Second, It didn't matter whether it's implemented elsewhere, because that's not what was claimed; it only matters whether it's an extension of the .zip format, because that is what the article claimed. Of course, that could soon change, because: Third, not only is there no structural difference between .zip and .zipx, but everyone (except perhaps DanChoe) knows that all the popular zip utilities can extract from .zipx files. Here are eleven other programs that support the newer formats that make a ZIP get a .zipx extension:
    1. SecureZIP (PKZIP GUI): "Technical Specifications — SecureZIP® Server". Milwaukee, Wisconsin: PKWARE, Inc. Retrieved 2015-12-05. Compression Algorithms: Deflate, Deflate64™, BZIP2, DCL Implode, LZMA, PPMd, Store (no compression) ... Supported File Extraction types: ZIP, RAR, TAR, GZIP, BZIP2, ARJ, BinHex(hqx), CAB, LZH, Uuencode, XXencode, .Z, .ZIPX, TAR BZIP2, TAR GZIP, .7z, .iso, OpenPGP 
    2. PKZIP Server (command line): "PKZIP Server Technical Specifications". Milwaukee, Wisconsin: PKWARE, Inc. Retrieved 2015-12-05. Compression Algorithms: Deflate, Deflate64™, BZIP2, DCL Implode, LZMA, PPMd, Store (no compression) ... Supported File Extraction types: ZIP, RAR, TAR, GZIP, BZIP2, ARJ, BinHex(hqx), CAB, LZH, Uuencode, XXencode, .Z, .ZIPX, .7z, .iso, TAR BZIP2, TAR GZIP, OpenPGP 
    3. 7-Zip: Pavlov, Igor (2015-11-19). "HISTORY of the 7-Zip". Retrieved 2015-12-05. 7-Zip now can extract .zipx (WinZip) archives that use xz compression.  (Also, "Supporting Bzip2 compression in ZIP archives." in 2003!)
    4. WinRAR: "WinRAR - What's new in the latest version". Berlin: win.rar GmbH. Retrieved 2015-12-05. Version 5.20 ... Added extraction support for ZIP and ZIPX archives using XZ compression algorithm. ... Version 5.10 ... Added extraction support for ZIP and ZIPX archives using BZIP2, LZMA and PPMd compression. 
    5. Info-Zip 3.0: "zip - package and compress (archive) files". 2011-04-14. Retrieved 2015-12-05. zip also now supports bzip2 compression if the bzip2 library is included when zip is compiled. 
    6. Info-Zip beta 3.1d: zip31d_ann.txt via "Re: New Zip 3.1 beta" on 2015-11-27: "LZMA and PPMd compression (in addition to Deflate, BZIP2 and Store). ... WinZip .zipx files mostly supported."
    7. PowerArchiver: "PowerArchiver". Reston, Virginia: ConeXware. Retrieved 2015-12-05. Fastest multicore ZIP/ZIPX engine with best ZIP/ZIPX support. Advanced ZIP/ZIPX AES encryption with FIPS 140-2 validation. Create ZIP, ZIPX, 7-Zip, ISO, CAB, TAR and open 30+ formats. 
    8. PeaZip: "ZIPX files: How to open and extract ZIPX archives". PeaZip srl. Retrieved 2015-12-05.  (Warning: Annoying fake download ads on this page.) — a whole page on how PeaZip uses the 7-Zip backend for .zipx files
    9. StuffIt Expander Windows: "StuffIt Expander Windows". Santa Cruz, California: Smith Micro Software. Retrieved 2015-12-05. support for expansion of SIT5, RAR and ZIPX archives 
    10. iZip (Mac utility): "IZIP FEATURES". Sydney: Codeius Pty Ltd. Retrieved 2015-12-05. supports ZIP, ZIPX, RAR, TAR, TAR.GZ and 7ZIP 
    11. BulkZip: "Changelog". BulkZip. Stuttgart: Northstone Consulting Ltd. Retrieved 2015-12-05. .ZIPX Support Read (WinZip 19 Archive) 
  • Did I mention that there's even another archive program called "ZipX", from South Africa, that is not owned by WinZip?

I hope that's enough to establish that .zipx is in widespread use and not even WinZip's authors think that .zipx is "proprietary" or separate from the ZIP format. I've been working on a page for years at User:Closeapple/info/Comparison of ZIP file archiver support to try to track down details. --Closeapple (talk) 19:32, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

I'm OK with zipx at least being mentioned. Rogerdpack (talk) 23:29, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

Magic numbers[edit]

The magic numbers seems to contain octal; is this the case? If so, why is there a sequence \008? Should it be \010? (talk) 13:56, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

No, they are hexadecimal. I changed it. --Ondertitel (talk) 15:29, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

What are some examples of ZIP formats without a PK magic number? — Brianary (talk) 16:40, 18 September 2017 (UTC)