|
|
Post by KraZy_SkitZy on Aug 3, 2003 23:04:48 GMT -5
What is your favorite Burning program?
Mine Would Have To Be Nero For Music & CloneCD For Everything Else
|
|
|
|
Post by AMD on Aug 3, 2003 23:14:55 GMT -5
RecordNow Max
Nero
CloneCD
and Windows XP embedded CD Burning software...
|
|
|
|
Post by KraZy_SkitZy on Aug 3, 2003 23:28:00 GMT -5
RecordNow Max Nero CloneCD and Windows XP embedded CD Burning software... I musat admit the embedded burning utility in windows is quite handy when you need to burn data in a hurry, or are still used to the way, you used to put data on a 3 1/2 floppy (tyou people know who you are, haha), but it is simplistic easy and quick not good for music though it seems like mp3 conversion is way too slow and game copying with the windows utility is about as useful as easy cd creator in game copying  ;D |
|
|
|
Post by AMD on Aug 3, 2003 23:33:35 GMT -5
Yeah, I only burn data and quick things...never anything too important though....It does remind me of the floppy days, this is even better ebcause you never have to close the cd and if it is a cdrw then it is infintely reusable...excuse the spelling or lack thereof
|
|
|
|
Post by KraZy_SkitZy on Aug 3, 2003 23:50:21 GMT -5
Yeah, I only burn data and quick things...never anything too important though....It does remind me of the floppy days, this is even better ebcause you never have to close the cd and if it is a cdrw then it is infintely reusable...excuse the spelling or lack thereof But you'd think microsoft cudda been smart enough to implemented this feature into Windows ME? |
|
|
|
Post by AMD on Aug 3, 2003 23:56:40 GMT -5
But you'd think microsoft cudda been smart enough to implemented this feature into Windows ME? They could have but, ME was a mistake to begin with...It was an experimnet gone wrong... |
|
|
|
Post by KraZy_SkitZy on Aug 4, 2003 0:21:33 GMT -5
They could have but, ME was a mistake to begin with...It was an experimnet gone wrong... I liked Windows ME, it never caused me a problem, and was more reliable than Windows 98 in my opinion ;D |
|
|
|
Post by moflsh03 on Aug 4, 2003 4:42:28 GMT -5
I liked Windows ME, it never caused me a problem, and was more reliable than Windows 98 in my opinion ;D The reason why so many people are upset with ME is the fact that instead of improving on some of the problems that are inherent with 98SE/FE M$ seemed to be more concerned with getting out a new version of 9x to milk that cow for the final time. Infact if you do some reading on ME bugs you will find many that should NOT have been there when it was released. These bugs are not the same old problems , but completely new annoyances. There seems to be two main reasons for SE/ME crashes. First, the root of the OS was NEVER good at dealing with software crashes...so MANY of 9x BODs are just its inability to deal with failing software. Macs never seemed to crash to the point of reboot, yet software failed quite often. NT seems to be good with dealing with crashing wares also. The other main reason for 9x crashes was its silly integration of Explorer/IE. I had it up to you know where with SE/ME crashing until I discovered 98lite which allowed me to eliminate this integration either partially or completely. Yes, I do crash at times, but its rare. I find myself rebooting because of small querks every now and then, but I rarely see BOD screens. Again as I stated above, the BODs I do see on rare occasion seem to be due to software failure and 9x's inability to cope. I have had success with ME builds, but I dont see any benefits with ME over SE. Infact I see the opposite..more resources being used especially when it comes to memory allocation and general bloat on my harddrive. This opinion is based on my observations and a VERY general understanding of what the experts have been talking about. So please realise I'm not trying to start a "fight" about OSs...afterall, its an operating system, not a lifestyle! ;D If its stable and workin for ya...stay with it.  NERO has frustrated the crap out of me many o'times for interesting reasons, but its the best professional burning software out there. Its used by the pros for many reasons that go way beyond what the general public really needs to burn data to a disk. I think the main reason it seems to have "won" that battle is the fact that its updated for new codec technology and hardware support constantly. Where as ECDC (which is probably a better product for the sake of ease of use) is put out as more of a package deal. I hear thats changing though. Also, I hear that NEROs new gui is better and maybe comparable for general use. Anybody here using NERO6 yet?? Curious what you think. WinXPs built in burning software..better than ECDC directCD?? I found DCD problematic at best. |
|
|
|
Post by AMD on Aug 4, 2003 10:37:24 GMT -5
I liked Windows ME, it never caused me a problem, and was more reliable than Windows 98 in my opinion ;D It didn't cause me problems either at first. As a matter of fact I liked it at the beginning but then one day, it turned inside out and revealed its ugly side. I lost tons of work and was dis-pleased with the fact that the OS had crapped out so soon. 98 SE with some major tweaks is good but It was unstable as heck I still like Windows 2000 and Windows XP Pro. |
|
|
|
Post by KraZy_SkitZy on Aug 5, 2003 0:42:53 GMT -5
The reason why so many people are upset with ME is the fact that instead of improving on some of the problems that are inherent with 98SE/FE M$ seemed to be more concerned with getting out a new version of 9x to milk that cow for the final time. Infact if you do some reading on ME bugs you will find many that should NOT have been there when it was released. These bugs are not the same old problems , but completely new annoyances. There seems to be two main reasons for SE/ME crashes. First, the root of the OS was NEVER good at dealing with software crashes...so MANY of 9x BODs are just its inability to deal with failing software. Macs never seemed to crash to the point of reboot, yet software failed quite often. NT seems to be good with dealing with crashing wares also. The other main reason for 9x crashes was its silly integration of Explorer/IE. I had it up to you know where with SE/ME crashing until I discovered 98lite which allowed me to eliminate this integration either partially or completely. Yes, I do crash at times, but its rare. I find myself rebooting because of small querks every now and then, but I rarely see BOD screens. Again as I stated above, the BODs I do see on rare occasion seem to be due to software failure and 9x's inability to cope. I have had success with ME builds, but I dont see any benefits with ME over SE. Infact I see the opposite..more resources being used especially when it comes to memory allocation and general bloat on my harddrive. This opinion is based on my observations and a VERY general understanding of what the experts have been talking about. So please realise I'm not trying to start a "fight" about OSs...afterall, its an operating system, not a lifestyle! ;D If its stable and workin for ya...stay with it. NERO has frustrated the crap out of me many o'times for interesting reasons, but its the best professional burning software out there. Its used by the pros for many reasons that go way beyond what the general public really needs to burn data to a disk. I think the main reason it seems to have "won" that battle is the fact that its updated for new codec technology and hardware support constantly. Where as ECDC (which is probably a better product for the sake of ease of use) is put out as more of a package deal. I hear thats changing though. Also, I hear that NEROs new gui is better and maybe comparable for general use. Anybody here using NERO6 yet?? Curious what you think. WinXPs built in burning software..better than ECDC directCD?? I found DCD problematic at best. It's alos more or less opinionated, Windows ME was either "You loved it or hated it"  |
|
|
|
Post by AMD on Aug 5, 2003 13:04:25 GMT -5
What you said is somewhat true but not 100% the reason why. You see, ME was really a quick and dirty project. I twas basically a 98SE slapped with a bit of new fature with a twist of NT. That mix wa poisonous and it killed that OS. When MS realized that they had milked the cow till it bled (ME) they decided enough was enough and had already brought out plans to have it replaced withthe better XP. XP is g-dsend though especially Pro.
|
|
|
|
Post by phixion on Aug 7, 2003 20:08:37 GMT -5
I'm pretty partial to my install of Nero 5.5 that I have here. Works great for me.  |
|
|
|
Post by KraZy_SkitZy on Aug 8, 2003 20:17:54 GMT -5
What you said is somewhat true but not 100% the reason why. You see, ME was really a quick and dirty project. I twas basically a 98SE slapped with a bit of new fature with a twist of NT. That mix wa poisonous and it killed that OS. When MS realized that they had milked the cow till it bled (ME) they decided enough was enough and had already brought out plans to have it replaced withthe better XP. XP is g-dsend though especially Pro. But as my personal choice for either WinME or 98, I prefer WinME, what ever worx best for YOU/YOURSELF is what is best, WinME may have lotsa bugs but it does work best for dsome ppl out there, you cannot deny WinME has had some successes out there with ppl making it not a totraly failure ;D |
|
|
|
Post by AMD on Aug 8, 2003 23:49:09 GMT -5
To each his own...
ME was not too bad or too good but it serves some just right. I know I used to like it simply becuase of the built in picture preview.
|
|
|
|
Post by KraZy_SkitZy on Aug 9, 2003 0:00:13 GMT -5
To each his own... ME was not too bad or too good but it serves some just right. I know I used to like it simply becuase of the built in picture preview. I liked it because I never had a problem with it, aps and games ran faster and windows booted alot faster, ;D |
|
;D
