Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
skipit

A question for IMGBurn fans

Recommended Posts

Just a simple thing, really. Are there practical reasons to use ImgBurn instead of Nero for burning DVD files onto single or dual-layer discs? For example, is the quality of an ImgBurn created disc consistently 'better' than a Nero created disc? I understand that there are nice things about ImgBurn- small footprint, easy to use, et cetera. But those are not really enough to justify, to me anyway, a lot of enthusiasm for ImgBurn, so I figure that there is something I am not seeing. What makes ImgBurn better in real world terms (burning discs) compared to Nero?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The burn quality is nothing to do with the software being used.

 

After that, each program has it's own set of features that make people (not) want to use it.

 

ImgBurn has the burn queue, better DL support (including layer break selection/preview and 32k gaps), support for changing advanced drive features, the automatic write speed control stuff, the ability to capture burn speed/buffer/cpu info during the write operation. It also keeps you informed of everything it's doing - believe it or not, people really like that! It's just lots of little things to be honest.

 

At the end of the day, you pays your money (or not in the case of ImgBurn) and makes your choice. Each to their own and all that.

 

Oh and of course you'll get enthusiastic people here on this forum - why else would they be here?! Being able to get support from the actual developer must be nice too :) Try getting that from a company ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The burn quality is nothing to do with the software being used.

 

After that, each program has it's own set of features that make people (not) want to use it.

 

Exactly. That is part of why we all enjoyed DVD Decrypter for years. You have an excellent reputation nowadays for producing really phenomenal software, which is why I am here in the first place. (grin)

 

ImgBurn has the burn queue, better DL support (including layer break selection/preview and 32k gaps), support for changing advanced drive features, the automatic write speed control stuff, the ability to capture burn speed/buffer/cpu info during the write operation. It also keeps you informed of everything it's doing - believe it or not, people really like that! It's just lots of little things to be honest.

 

Ah ha! Now that is what I was seeking. If it does all of that, and you created it, I am sold on it. Good deal.

 

At the end of the day, you pays your money (or not in the case of ImgBurn) and makes your choice. Each to their own and all that.

 

Pay? For Nero? Surely you jest. ;)

 

No need to answer that. heh.

 

Oh and of course you'll get enthusiastic people here on this forum - why else would they be here?! Being able to get support from the actual developer must be nice too :) Try getting that from a company ;)

 

No kidding. You do have a reputation for that as well. All right. I will give it a try. Thank you, Lightning UK. Hopefully this thread will answer other people who come here with the same basic question that I did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

nero has a nasty habit of getting corrupt, causing all sorts of problems with updates/upgrades, hence nero coming out with their clean tools, they seemed to have addressed this with the new version 8

 

Then you have the problem with resources as with almost any bloatware, their ultrabuffer asks for a lot of ram when burning a dvd, not quite sure what was the point in all that?

 

For troubleshooting bus issues, Imgburn's filter driver load order tool is quite handy for support.

 

One of the first things I suggest when a person is having issues burning dvd's with nero is using Imgburn to trouble shoot with.

 

I can't even imagine using nero to troubleshoot Imgburn.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

and then there's the update issue, 8's official release date was oct 1?

 

and they are already up to

 

Version: 8.1.1.0b

Release Date: October 10, 2007

File Size: 178 MB (187041352 bytes)

MD5 checksum: b57d6bc7bdba8e626d50a962e17e069f

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For me personally, then the biggest selling point of ImgBurn is it's advanced configurability. Let's take something like verifying a burn. Most other apps have a check-box for that option and then it's that. Now with ImgBurn, then besides this check-box, you additionally have the option of defining with what reading speed that the verifying process should be carried out at, and also if you want to just verify the readability of the actual blocks, or to also check that the written files are bit-identical to the source files, and then if an actual verify error does occure, then ImgBurn tells you exactly which file(s) the faulty blocks belongs too. Now how cool is that, and that's of course just one little example of one little feature, and where ImgBurn has loads of those available. Of course then it also dosen't hurt that the GUI is very intelligently designed, so that each writing job dosen't take a bunch of clicks to get through, and that it's low on resources and un-bloated. At the end of the day, then you just know that LUK! has designed and coded the best damn writing tool ever made, period :) So why would we ever go use something else... :)

 

(Just like Peter's foobar2000, which IMHO is the best damn audio player/organiser ever made :))

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have found that ImgBurn does not appear to use the resources that Nero or Roxio have used. I have had much better success with this program than those 2. Resource hogs both...keep up the good work. :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can't justify a free burning program that is easy to use and fits on a floppy over Nero which is easily ten times the size for the burning core of the program. The commonly used features are all on par and for the rest; they require the 10 separate modules Nero installs.

 

Now you could just say but it doesn't support burning audio cds, though last I checked that was broken from late 6.xx series to late 7.xx series anyways. (the broken mp3 conversion dll)

 

The lighter footprint allows it to run smoothly on older machines, so it typically decides not to freeze when the buffer runs out, unlike another program.

 

Imgburn costs about $79.99 less then Nero as well. In a world of rampaging pirates that doesn't mean a lot, but if free works better then pay, why bother jumping hoops?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And audio CDs is coming in the next release. :)

 

Regards

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
...burning program that is easy to use and fits on a floppy over Nero ...

Wow -this was by design? And I thought I was incredibly intelligent for being able to figure that out for myself!

 

 

And audio CDs is coming in the next release. :)

And after this ULTIMATE update, one would never need to even look at any more writing programs!!!

 

 

@Skipit

After using Imgburn my coaster rate has dropped to ZERO! (from about one in four!)

 

Even DVDdecrypter was better than Nero; but it seemed that the few-and-far-between reasons to keep Nero around kept diminishing, and when Imgburn2 came around, it sealed the proverbial fate. Imgburn, it should be noted, just works! (from a 233MHz to a 733 to 1.4GHz to the 3.2... CPUs) and even with 512MB RAM

 

 

We older-newbies are forever fans of this group LUK, Blutach, DG, r0lZ, JSoto, dspguru....!!

 

Thanks again

Edited by OrigGMan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

DSPguru - now that's a name I haven't seen for a while. His work with BeSweet was magnificent.

 

Regards

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just a simple thing, really. Are there practical reasons to use ImgBurn instead of Nero for burning DVD files onto single or dual-layer discs? For example, is the quality of an ImgBurn created disc consistently 'better' than a Nero created disc? I understand that there are nice things about ImgBurn- small footprint, easy to use, et cetera. But those are not really enough to justify, to me anyway, a lot of enthusiasm for ImgBurn, so I figure that there is something I am not seeing. What makes ImgBurn better in real world terms (burning discs) compared to Nero?

 

The reason I got ImgBurn was because my new Vista machine came with a basic version of Roxio. I was amazed that on a new laptop with 1.8Ghz dual core with 2GB of RAM, it took longer to load than easy cd creator 4 on my PII machine, which is unacceptable if all you're trying to do is make simple burns. I started looking for options and found my Nero 6 that came with my desktop burner wasn't compatible with Vista. So after searching for quality Vista compatible freeware burning software I ended up with ImgBurn and InfraRecorder.

 

When I first ran Imgburn I thought "Wow, this looks a lot like DVD decrypter", then I found out why :P.

 

I have since downgraded my laptop to WinXP. I chose not to install Nero 6 but instead kept with the above tools for the following reasons.

 

I like ImgBurn for it's control over the burning process, and some of the detailed settings. For example since I have gobs of RAM I tell it to maximize the buffer. The only thing I don't like about ImgBurn is the limited interface for layout of file systems. For this and audio CDs InfraRecorder is better. For burning isos or generating simple burns, ImgBurn is king.

 

And really the smaller footprint is really important. If I want to burn a simple data disc or ISO, I don't want to wait a minute for the software to load. And I don't want hundreds of Megs of hard drive to be taken up by useless addons that I never use. I want a simple straightforward tool that excels at what it does. Of which ImgBurn and Infrarecorder do.

 

Oh and the price is right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because when using ImgBurn I get consistenly good results over anything else that I've tried (and I've tried a lot!). What else matters?

 

After some years of futzing around with Roxio, NTI, Nero, and the many others, I now save myself a lot of time, trouble, and disk space by just using ImgBurn. Never mind the constant annoyance of the numerous upgrades and bugs in the others, ImgBurn is hands down the best for burning. I still have NTI loaded since it was bundled with my laptop and has some nice features I occasionally use, but I use ImgBurn 99.99% of the time. A lot less of a resource hog, too.

 

Load it and try it. Keep the others. If you give it a shot, over time you'll find yourself using ImgBurn more and more and the others less and less. It is an awesome piece of software - a joy to use and one of the best. I write software and I know a good job when I see it. This software is a model of good design and performance.

 

Cheers!

 

Bron

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just as soon as its been throughly tested and the Boss chooses to release it. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just as soon as its been throughly tested and the Boss chooses to release it. :)

 

 

sounds good, looking forward to it, any chance on the version number? is this going to be an update to 2x series or are we talking about 3x? if you can say....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You gunna get more excited if it's a 3.x? Would that connote a bigger upgrade than 2.4.0.0?

 

Won't get it released any quicker, nor will it include any features that are not planned to be included :)

 

Regards

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Where would you get such a preposterous idea?

 

Really!!!

 

Regards

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I also used Nero for years, mainly for it's conversion capabilities and CD Burning. After learning that the burn quality isn't dependent on the software, but the burner, has changed what software I use and cut down on the many software programs I have installed. When software companies become popular then they want to become the one stop shopper paradise. Like was said earlier Nero is really bloated and buggy still even more.

 

I've have worked on breaking away from Nero and as of right now I'm Nero free :thumbup: Yippie!

I was sick of Nero's problems and ImgBurn has helped me get rid of Nero. Too bad it can't decrypt anymore, but

there are other tools for that. Like DVD Decrypter, ImgBurn has many tools and features. Yes, its a bit of a

learning curve to find and use them, but where else can you get great support like you can here? From Nero? LOL NOT!

 

Some of the coolest features to me are the right click context menu options included for reading DVD and burning

images from ISO or MDS files. If you right click the ISO and there is a MDS file also, it reminds you to use the MDS

file with a funny reminder. It auto names image files when reading, lets you select a layer break (something I'm still

in the learning process with), and you can change the volume label...I think thats really cool. Thats what shows up

when you put the DVD in the drive and look in explorer for the title.

 

And something I didn't know it would do at first is to write a DVD from video files ( a VIDEO_TS) on your hard drive. It will burn it to a DVD or make a image file from them. How cool is that? It also by default makes the AUDIO_TS folder

which is something I've not seen any other program do. It's not usually needed anymore, but sometimes without it

a stand alone DVD player could have problems due to compatibility. Very nice feature to me.

 

It a tiny file with huge capabilities and easy to use at face value. Many features once you learn them and great support. When I get back to work I'm buying it.... :rolleyes: (making a contribution). I've said thanks many times in here for this great program and I'll say again....Thanks!

Edited by Sliztzan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.