A previous discussion on Cryptography StackExchange leads me to understand that 7-Zip does not use salt to derive an encryption key from password to use its AES-256 encryption; that this is a potentially severe shortcoming; and that its impact is to make it relatively easy to crack multiple .7z files.
My question is, what does this mean in practice? Possible inferences or points of confusion:
(1) Virtually all other notable AES-256 file encryption tools (e.g., AES Crypt, Gpg4win, Cryptomator) do use salt; therefore they are significantly more secure than 7-Zip.
(2) The absence of salt doesn't have any practical effect on brute force password cracking methods, else Elcomsoft would not say that .7z is still harder to crack than RAR5.
(3) The absence of salt is a severe shortcoming only where the cracker seeks access to multiple .7z files. But why would that make a difference? If all those files use the same password, then yes, brute forcing one will open them all. If they use different passwords, the absence of salt would presumably make no difference.
(4) The absence of salt in 7-Zip is moot if I use some other AES-256 tool with salt to create a .7z file.