Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
StanTek

This program is SICK!!!!!

Recommended Posts

I burn a lot of dvd's. I have used pretty much all the burning software out here and the best 2 are Alcohol 120% and Nero. The major reason why these two programs are better than the rest is because it gives you the option to use multiple dvd drives while burning. Basically what that means is that if you have more than one dvd burner installed on your pc; your burning software will allow you to use it to make multiple copies. THAT IS THE ONLY THING THAT IMGBURN IS LACKING!!! Please try to impliment this feature in your future release. If you can do that then this program will be pretty hard to compete against. Also make sure there is plenty of caching involved so that there is no sync problems while using multiple burners. Keep up the good work. This program is well developed and it kicks ass.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

this has been mentioned many times before.............. and you get the same answer as well

 

you need a reeeeally top end system to be able to do multiple burns at the same time . the chances of the average user having such system is highly unlikely .

 

your likely to get I/O errors as well if using 1 hdd to feed more than 1 optical drive at a time, so its not a thing we would recommend doing I'm afraid, and is unlikely to be implemented

 

next time you do multiple burns with the software you mentioned, watch the "actual" time it takes on a clock ( not what *spit* nero tells you on screen ). if memory serve me right I think its been mentioned before that multiple burns took twice as long when using 2 optical drives burning at the same time than doing 2 separate burns one after the other on the same burner

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
this has been mentioned many times before.............. and you get the same answer as well

 

you need a reeeeally top end system to be able to do multiple burns at the same time . the chances of the average user having such system is highly unlikely .

 

your likely to get I/O errors as well if using 1 hdd to feed more than 1 optical drive at a time, so its not a thing we would recommend doing I'm afraid, and is unlikely to be implemented

 

next time you do multiple burns with the software you mentioned, watch the "actual" time it takes on a clock ( not what *spit* nero tells you on screen ). if memory serve me right I think its been mentioned before that multiple burns took twice as long when using 2 optical drives burning at the same time than doing 2 separate burns one after the other on the same burner

 

Let's see here. I got my MCSE in Windows 2003 server and my ACT certification. I've been working on PC's, building and repairing networks for over 17 years. Like I said before. I burn a lot of dvd's. My 3 computers have 4 dvd burner drives installed on them. I don't get any I/O errors while burning. If your dvd drives are running the latest firmware, your computer is running a lot of ram (2 gigs or more) and if your pc is configured properly; you should not have really no problems burning multiple dvd's. This is the new age, people are doing more things with their computers. We have Duo core processors and the Quad cores are comming out. So running multiple dvd drives shouldn't be a problem. Us advance users need to be heard too. Everything shouldn't just be for the novice users especially if you are taking donations. IMGBURN is a dvd burning software. It just doesn't make since for it to only be allowed to use only 1 dvd while burning. But, I understand. You guys just want to take the easy way out and just stick with single dvd burning. Like you said this has been requested many times before, so why can't we have it. :blink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
this has been mentioned many times before.............. and you get the same answer as well

 

you need a reeeeally top end system to be able to do multiple burns at the same time . the chances of the average user having such system is highly unlikely .

 

your likely to get I/O errors as well if using 1 hdd to feed more than 1 optical drive at a time, so its not a thing we would recommend doing I'm afraid, and is unlikely to be implemented

 

next time you do multiple burns with the software you mentioned, watch the "actual" time it takes on a clock ( not what *spit* nero tells you on screen ). if memory serve me right I think its been mentioned before that multiple burns took twice as long when using 2 optical drives burning at the same time than doing 2 separate burns one after the other on the same burner

 

Let's see here. I got my MCSE in Windows 2003 server and my ACT certification. I've been working on PC's, building and repairing networks for over 17 years. Like I said before. I burn a lot of dvd's. My 3 computers have 4 dvd burner drives installed on them. I don't get any I/O errors while burning. If your dvd drives are running the latest firmware, your computer is running a lot of ram (2 gigs or more) and if your pc is configured properly; you should not have really no problems burning multiple dvd's. This is the new age, people are doing more things with their computers. We have Duo core processors and the Quad cores are comming out. So running multiple dvd drives shouldn't be a problem. Us advance users need to be heard too. Everything shouldn't just be for the novice users especially if you are taking donations. IMGBURN is a dvd burning software. It just doesn't make since for it to only be allowed to use only 1 dvd while burning. But, I understand. You guys just want to take the easy way out and just stick with single dvd burning. Like you said this has been requested many times before, so why can't we have it. :blink:

I DO like clever replies :rolleyes:

didnt i already say "you need a reeeeally top end system to be able to do multiple burns at the same time" ?

 

try using 3 or 4 burners from 1 HDD with nero or alcohol , AND as i said earlier (as well) watch the actual time on a clock and dont beleive everything nero tells you , but then you already knew that given your qualifications in computing.

Loved your sarcasm about us wanting the easy way out and sticking with single disc burning though :thumbup: , so you wont be offended when i tell you the programs name is ImgBurn and not ImgsBurns which would then indicate it does multiple burning :thumbup:

 

the point you made (that by the way backfires on you) is that ImgBurn is donationware and not "pay for" like Nero and Alcohol . Its not made for anyone in paticular ie novices,professionals ect ect ( where you wrongly assumed it was for novices only).

The object of LUK was to keep it simple and easy to use out of the box so to speak. All suggestions are taken on oard and LUK considers wether to implement them or not . The answer i gave you is the answer given out on previous occasions when people asked the question you asked. ( a search would of revealed this to you) but you "ADVANCED" ( your words not mine) wouldnt know that .

 

Oh, and i almost forgot , im running a quadcore, 3gb ram with 2 sataII drives and 3 burners ( 2 sata), and i cant burn 3 seperate named DVD's at the same time successfully, so your theory on the specs of a PC are a bit behind the times

so when you as an "Advanced" users get an upto date machine ( duo or quadcore)tell me how to do it with nero :rolleyes: untill then I'll just use the que Que feature in ImgBurn rather than screw up 2/3/4 discs at a time trying to multiple burns

regards

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
My 3 computers have 4 dvd burner drives installed on them.

 

There's your problem. Try putting them -in- your computers instead of -on- them. You'll get way better results.

 

And Ner0 (more like queer-o) doesn't have homestar effin runner on -their- forums. Booyeah! :homestar:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Let's see here. I got my MCSE in Windows 2003 server and my ACT certification. I've been working on PC's, building and repairing networks for over 17 years. Like I said before. I burn a lot of dvd's. My 3 computers have 4 dvd burner drives installed on them. I don't get any I/O errors while burning. If your dvd drives are running the latest firmware, your computer is running a lot of ram (2 gigs or more) and if your pc is configured properly; you should not have really no problems burning multiple dvd's. This is the new age, people are doing more things with their computers. We have Duo core processors and the Quad cores are comming out. So running multiple dvd drives shouldn't be a problem. Us advance users need to be heard too. Everything shouldn't just be for the novice users especially if you are taking donations. IMGBURN is a dvd burning software. It just doesn't make since for it to only be allowed to use only 1 dvd while burning. But, I understand. You guys just want to take the easy way out and just stick with single dvd burning. Like you said this has been requested many times before, so why can't we have it. :blink:

Did you try running multiple instances of ImgBurn?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

StanTek....

Like you said this has been requested many times before, so why can't we have it
.

 

 

:worthy: Boss :worthy: ....

It's too difficult to implement and I can't be arsed.

 

 

Asked and answered, the rest is superficial bullshit on your part trying to get what you can not get. Get over it and use Nero/xcopy/Roxio/ dvdcopy/shitboxes are us...or whatever you have on hand and move on. :shifty:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

StanTek

 

I can well believe you work in IT. You really need to work on your people skills!

 

Did you not read any of the other forum posts? LUK and imgburn, rightly so, have a very loyal following and to title your post "This program is SICK!!!!!" just isn't gonna win you too many popularity votes.

 

That said though I think your suggestion has been adequately replied too, but for myself I started using imgburn for the exact opposite reason to you.

 

I also have 6 DVD burners and (not wishing to get get into a pissing contest) have a fairly high spec box.

 

Burning one at a time using the queue feature is IMO the way to go, having used Nero etc in the past I get far fewer coasters this way. In fact since using imgburn I've had none (apart from bad iso's).

 

And as one MCP (ten a penny) to another, grow up.

 

Balders

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(This is a response ONLY to the silly and lame comments posted - not all were)

Wow! Is all I can say. "This program is sick!" Translation for lamers that doesn't know the lingo is: This is a very good burning program. I'm posting in a forum. What people skills do I need? Either you know what I'm saying or you don't. If you read my very first post I said that the ONLY problem with IMGBURN is that it doesn't allow multiple dvd drive burning. I ran a simple test. I've installed IMGBURN on ten of my client's computers and all ten of my clients didn't know how to use IMGBURN! They didn't know what a BIN, CUE, IMG or ISO file format was. (But some of them knew how to use Nero) So technically IMGBURN is not for novice users because you need 2 be a little advanced in your computer knowledge in order to use this program. I posted on here to get a current answer. I wasn't trying to offend anyone. All I got mostly was bad attitudes to a simple question. As I said before if this program did implement such a feature it would be very difficult to compete against! Now as for Dual and Quad-core processors. I have 2 computers with Intel Quad core processors and 1 computer with a Intel Dual core processor. What I meant earlier about the Quad cores coming out; I mean that the Quad cores doesn't come standard on new computers. I guess I have to be real specific here while making a simple statement. I supervise 6 men and 2 women in my IT department. My customer service skills are very good. I'm not going to boast about the home I own and the cars I drive to respond to a silly comment. As far as burning goes I use Alcohol 120%. Now while using multiple drives (mostly 3 or 4 dvd drives) I have no problems burning 4 to 8 gig ISO's to my dvds. So I don't see what the problem is. I take that back I do see what the problem is but I'm not going to mention it. I posted here because I wanted the ACTUAL PROGRAMMER OR PROGRAMMERS for IMGBURN to read my request. Not to sit here and read silly comments by people that doesn't have nothing to do with the software's implementation. I've ran multiple instances of IMGBURN to burn dvd's. It works but it hogs up a lot of memory. But if the feature was enabled it may run a bit smoother. Well, I guess I'll keep using Alcohol 120% until someone makes a freeware program that will make the other companies like Nero, etc get their crap together. In part, DVD Decrypter was a freeware program that kicked ass. It is still widely used today; which is funny because there is no more support for it. That program did its job. It decrypted dvd's. The only other program that could compete against it was Anydvd by Slysoft which you had to pay for. Well, I didn't lol :teehee: . But you guys know what I mean. I just thought that IMGBURN could have the same mystique as DVD Decypter. A freeware program that had all the features of a paid program. But IMGBURN would do a better job at it or be just as good. Then next thing you know some major burning software company is offering millions of dollars to buy this program and finally pay you programmers for all the hard work you put into IMGBURN. :thumbup:

 

 

 

 

StanTek

 

I can well believe you work in IT. You really need to work on your people skills!

 

Did you not read any of the other forum posts? LUK and imgburn, rightly so, have a very loyal following and to title your post "This program is SICK!!!!!" just isn't gonna win you too many popularity votes.

 

That said though I think your suggestion has been adequately replied too, but for myself I started using imgburn for the exact opposite reason to you.

 

I also have 6 DVD burners and (not wishing to get get into a pissing contest) have a fairly high spec box.

 

Burning one at a time using the queue feature is IMO the way to go, having used Nero etc in the past I get far fewer coasters this way. In fact since using imgburn I've had none (apart from bad iso's).

 

And as one MCP (ten a penny) to another, grow up.

 

Balders

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
StanTek....
Like you said this has been requested many times before, so why can't we have it
.

 

 

:worthy: Boss :worthy: ....

It's too difficult to implement and I can't be arsed.

 

 

Asked and answered, the rest is superficial bullshit on your part trying to get what you can not get. Get over it and use Nero/xcopy/Roxio/ dvdcopy/shitboxes are us...or whatever you have on hand and move on. :shifty:

 

 

Totaly unnecessary. Read my final reply.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What I meant earlier about the Quad cores coming out; I mean that the Quad cores doesn't come standard on new computers.

 

Guess again. My new computers came with Quad cores as standard.

 

 

I posted here because I wanted the ACTUAL PROGRAMMER OR PROGRAMMERS for IMGBURN to read my request

 

 

The Author gave you an answer.

 

 

Thanks. Read my final reply.

 

Then next thing you know some major burning software company is offering millions of dollars to buy this program and finally pay you programmers for all the hard work you put into IMGBURN

 

 

Is that cryptic sarcasm ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Glad I've stayed outa this one....to date, anyway.

 

@StanTek - all I can say is this is freeware. As such, the program goes where the author wants to take it (even payware does this). You have made a specific suggestion which LUK (who is the sole programmer) has said he isn't interested in implementing. That's really where it should end; there's no use getting into a pissing contest about computer skills and hardware. LUK has said he doesn't wanna do it - end of story in my book.

 

I don't know if you have donated to ImgBurn, but if you haven't, it makes your argument even more tenuous, IMHO.

 

As for "competing", I suspect that ImgBurn does pretty damn well against junk like Ner0. In any event, since ImgBurn is free, there is no need to compete. It is offered to a (usually) very grateful public for their use. If you don't feel it serves your particular needs, then you can obviously continue using solutions which do.

 

Regards

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a follow-up to suggestions made above to test write speeds:

 

I tried burning multiple discs sequentially with ImgBurn, then burning concurrently with Nero. ImgBurn took 8 minutes to burn two discs, Nero took 3 minutes. These are stopwatch times, not the times displayed by the program (which matched perfectly in both cases anyway). I did not try the "multiple instances of ImgBurn" suggestion because that seems kludgy at best.

 

Most important to note is that I'm not running quad-core or anything fancy. It's a 4-year-old P4 system with a rather pokey WD 500GB HDD and 1GB of RAM. I've been doing it this way for years and Nero works just fine writing up to 4 DVDs simultaneously (even when two of the drives are external USB drives). I have no issues with coasters or CPU degradation or anything. Writing 4 discs at the same time does take longer than writing 2 discs, but nowhere near twice as long. There are big time savings to be had, and no real downside. In fact, I'm burning to multiple discs right now as I write this.

 

Without any disrespect intended to any comments above, CPU and HDD speeds should not have any bearing on writing to multiple drives simultaneously. Even the slowest modern systems will be able to provide data faster than is needed to perform the write (at least up to 12X, which is what I'm using). What really matters is the caching and memory management strategies employed by the burning software.

 

I came to ImgBurn because I'm tired of Nero's devolution. ImgBurn is certainly a Nero-killer for most burn-related tasks, but it definitely has a blind spot on multiple drives. Nero has rapidly become bloated junkware, but I guess I'll keep it around just for this one capability...

 

+

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.