What's the difference between "extracting" and just copying?

If I right click on a zip file to extract the files (windows vista) , the process takes 30 minutes for 12MB of files and folders.

Alternatively, if I just open the zip file then copy the contents to another folder, the process takes a fraction of the time.

I'm speaking of software that installs no problem no matter which method I choose.

So what's the point of "extracting" the contents if copying the does the same thing in a fraction of the time?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RickJ

What's the difference between "extracting" and just copying?

If I right click on a zip file to extract the files (windows vista) , the process takes 30 minutes for 12MB of files and folders.

Alternatively, if I just open the zip file then copy the contents to another folder, the process takes a fraction of the time.

I'm speaking of software that installs no problem no matter which method I choose.

So what's the point of "extracting" the contents if copying the does the same thing in a fraction of the time?

---

Hello Rick,

Both methods obtain the same result; however, I'm surprised at how long it takes to "extract" your files. It really shouldn't take long at all; however, since I'm not a Vista expert, I can't say for sure. Just curious though, what program are you using to do the extracting and where are you extracting the files to (ie, internal hard drive, external hard drive, etc)?

I believe that if you extract you will get the resulting file structure as it was intended during the zip. If you copy then the files all get lumped in the folder that you choose.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NeedKarma

I believe that if you extract you will get the resulting file structure as it was intended during the zip. If you copy then the files all get lumped in the folder that you choose.

---

Hello NeedKarma,

From my experience, there is no difference in doing an "open, select all, copy" and then pasting the contents to a folder/directory (let's say) named Test Folder as opposed to "extracting" (ie, unzipping) to a folder named Test Folder. However, the extraction process does have benefits; in that, it can handle huge sizes and quantities of files/folders; whereas, the clipboard does have some limitations. So if any file structure exists within the zip archive, it will be reproduced "in-tact" using either method (from my experience). In fact, even if you have a "zip inside a zip", both methods will work the same. However, if you can provide a specific example, I'm always willing to learn a new thing or two.

Thanks, all. The instance I'm speaking of is extracting from zip folder on desktop to a folder on my hard drive.

I find that just selecting all the files and copying them to another folder on the desktop is not only faster but also retains the structure..

... so I'll to the copy thing from now on :)

I'm very surprised at how long it takes to "extract" your files, it only takes mine 5 seconds, the results are the same, it could just be your p.c.

You can also drag the content from the zip to an open folder.

Sathyan :)