ImgBurn vs Nero + Alcohol 120%

[shk]

I'd like to switch because ImgBurn is a progression/enhancement/degredation of the "no longer mentioned program - lmfao" but I need some solid reasons why it will be an improvement over using Nero to burn my DVDs and Alcohol 120 for my image burning/making needs.

 

I'd say I've never had a problem with Nero for DVDs and alcohol 120 is a gem of a program in my opinion.

 

But prove me wrong!

[cornholio7]

use it and prove it to yourself

nobody is forcing anyone to use anything, but you won't get support from nero like you will here, directly from the guy who wrote the programme. he also wrote the other no longer mentioned programme (and i dont find that funny at all)

i tried nero for dvd's and it sucked, imgburn calculates the optimal layerbreak position for me from vob files, i dont have any coasters whereas i did with nero

alcohol is a good programme , but i still prefer imgburn, it does everything I want

[dontasciime]

Where's Wally ?

[shk]

use it and prove it to yourself

nobody is forcing anyone to use anything, but you won't get support from nero like you will here, directly from the guy who wrote the programme. he also wrote the other no longer mentioned programme (and i dont find that funny at all)

i tried nero for dvd's and it sucked, imgburn calculates the optimal layerbreak position for me from vob files, i dont have any coasters whereas i did with nero

alcohol is a good programme , but i still prefer imgburn, it does everything I want

 

The first line sounds like I'm supposed to experiment + find reasons on my own. Are there not actual reasons besides my own personal preference?

 

The support is definately a plus, I'd rather have the programmer do it instead of 1000 drones who know little about the technical things. So that's good.

 

Yea Nero determines the breaks on its own...I didn't have coasters but I suppose I'd like to have control over that anyway.

 

And for alcohol...no comments? Any specific things imgburn betters in?

[random]

My biggest problem with Nero is it's graphic heavy interface done in flash. I have had more troubles opening and closing the program, bothersome to say the least!

[shk]

Yea that's a minor issue; but it's with 7 and up versions. 6 is less bloaty. I'll deal with the crap if it makes dvds better though; haven't really had problems with it.

 

The only thing I'm considering now is the fact that ImgBurn lets you hand pick what layer break you want. Anything else?

[polopony]

I don't really understand why you have to be convinced to use IMBburn .Its about choices and having more than 1 . If you're happy with Nero and 120 then thats OK it fills your needs .The world will not stop if you dont use IMGburn and the truth of the matter is no one will care either way .If you cant/wont try the software thats OK too, its your choice.

 

"The first line sounds like I'm supposed to experiment + find reasons on my own. Are there not actual reasons besides my own personal preference?"

 

its all about personal preferance after all isn't it

[Kenadjian]

I don't understand this constant comparison with nero/alcohol etc.

 

It's another burning program, so whatever works for you best should be the one you use, no?

 

But, here is some points to think about.

 

When you look at an install file size of 1MB vs 35MB plus for the others, then you look at just a single EXE file vs shit plasterd all over your HDD with the others, then the simple easy to use GUI, then the support offered by many knowledgeable members.

 

It makes the choice very simple in my books.

[shk]

Hmm, I suppose that's true.

 

I really like imgburn, I was just hoping for specific things that it's better in. That way if I recommend it to others I can say a little more than just "it has a nice gui" or "well, if you try it...I think you will come to prefer it because of...your personal preference of it!"

 

But some of the things do ring true; I'd say for me I'll use it over nero 'cause it's much less bulky. Nero's going downhill with every successive version, so this will be a good alternative.

[JasonFriday13]

I haven't touched Nero since I found this program. I only use nero to make copies of audio CDs, which I haven't done in months. ImgBurn is an awesome program. Definitly prefer it over nero (For the burning part anyway) .

[bootsector]

Why I use ImgBurn instead of Nero or any other burning program:

 

:. ImgBurn is not bloatware

 

:. ImgBurn does everything I want and does it simply and efficiently

 

:. I am a huge fan of LUK!

 

:. ImgBurn support is the #1, thanks to LUK! and all fellows here in this message board

 

:. ImgBurn is FREEWARE! (Anyway, I really recommend you to donate a couple of bucks, so LUK! can always improve it!)

 

Best regards,

 

bootsector

[blutach]

And Ner0 STILL can not technically set a layer break right, despite you paying for the privilege of owning it.

 

And if you can't be farked to try a bit of freeware and compare, you're just stirring.

 

Regards

[lfcrule1972]

I tried an earlier version of Nero and found it to be the worst piece of burning software I have ever tried - even the originally installed Roxio on my PC was better !!

 

ImgBurn is simple to use, easy to get to grips with and the support is second to none...... Look at the updates that LUK! has put into his program at the suggestion of users - does Nero do that ?

 

When you consider that ImgBurn is donationware I don't see the need for any further comparisons.....

[polopony]

Where's Wally ?

 

Wally is alive and well , heard from him recently

[lfcrule1972]

[LIGHTNING UK!]

lol I found him

 

BUMP

[lfcrule1972]

Me too !

[polopony]

same here

[JasonFriday13]

I think I found him too.

[spinningwheel]

Yup...Had to use the magnifier setting...damned glasses...lmao

[blutach]

No doubt. He's there. Quick, get the RPGs

 

Regards

[lfcrule1972]

I should start a new topic with these pics - didn't realise it would be so popular when I posted it as a joke

[spinningwheel]

[shade42]

I'd like to switch because ImgBurn is a progression/enhancement/degredation of the "no longer mentioned program - lmfao" but I need some solid reasons why it will be an improvement over using Nero to burn my DVDs and Alcohol 120 for my image burning/making needs.

This is a sensible question, and I second it. I will probably continue to use ImgBurn due to faith in its author's work and the excellent support, but that doesn't mean I don't want to know what the known advantages are, if any, compared with Nero. ImgBurn gives a choice of position for the layer break on double layer discs and Nero doesn't, but I will probably always choose the position that's given the best score, so that isn't necessarily an advantage.

 

For what it's worth, I have made 3 DL discs with Nero, of which one was a coaster. I can't report on the results with ImgBurn yet since I've only just discovered it.

[Shamus_McFartfinger]

Nero is a noobie tool. It packages everything into a simplistic, bloated tool. I'm not denying that it's useful but it's more suited to beginners who want to throw a disk in and hit a button. ImgBurn is more suited to users that are reasonably computer literate. It's small, fast and well supported with options available that you can't get elsewhere.

 

As for burn results, that's down to your media and your drive. I would guess that crap media is responsible for three quarters of the problems we see here. No software, no matter how brilliant it is, can turn a crap disk into a good one.