Nero for Linux
 

Believe it or not. Nero is out for Linux. I still love K3b but this is certaintly something to know about. Here's the stuff. Thera are also some screenshots.

First, I should say that I do have issues with K3b. That being said, IMHO part of what makes linux great is the open-source software that it's constructed upon. Sure we could go over to closed source software and still be running "Linux" however (not to be fanatical about it) once we start down that slippery slope it's only a matter of time before we go the way of Windoze. In conclusion, save a tree, be kind and rewind, and above all else SUPPORT OPEN SOURCE SOFTWARE!!! Thank you.

Opensource has become a slogan that has annoyed me now, which is epitomized in you. I use software, I like good software. If it is bad software I won't use it. License is irrelevant. Half you [edited] who rants about open-source never even have looked at the source code of these programs let alone understand a quarter of it.

Its the quality of the stuff, screw what license it comes under. For some things windows is much better than linux, for others linux is better. For each application and circumstance I see which is better and use it under the appropriate one. To say one sucks and only use the other is simply shooting yourself in the foot. I understand if you don't have the financial capabilities to pay for it, fine, but even then you shouldn't rant and shout out "SUPPORT OPEN SOURCE SOFTWARE!!!".

Wow, take a year off or something Pauli? It's good to express your opinion but leave the unecessary descriptive words out of your posts please that offend others.

Regards.

And to get the discussion back on topic

Maybe so, but if you're using Windows or some other proprietary software, when's the last time you looked at their source code? Oops, sorry, it turns out that's not an option.
And the point of this comment is .... what? You seem to be implying that expensive commercial software is automatically better than free software, which just isn't true. Apart from that though, what difference does it possibly make what somebody's financial situation is? Good software is good software, regardless of how much it costs, and if someone who is using open source software wants to promote it, how is that a bad thing? As you say yourself, "it's the quality of the stuff", and if you've got two programs that both do the same exact thing (such as burning CD's), does it make more sense to shell out $X for a commercial version, or do download an open source equivalent? If you ask me, the rational thing to do would be to go with open source.

Just my 2 cents, as always -- J.W.

Hm this section bothered me a little...
So for one they don't support their stuff and for two you have to have a purchased copy that only works on windows? So this is only free for dual booters who have Nero on their windows OS. Also I don't see where you can just flat out buy NEROLinux. Hm sounds like a half done job to try and get your product into the expanding world of linux.

I have a dual boot PC with linux and XP.
For me ,if I want to burn something to a cd or dvd,I will boot into XP.
I hope that FSF doesn't play the anti-piracy game.Because I am poor.:D

The sad thing is, whenever I boot into Windows, there isnt a piece of software on there that I've paid cash for. I'm a criminal because of that. When I boot into linux there isnt a single piece of software I've paid cash for and its all totally legal. I dont know what that says but it makes me wonder if the moment apps like Nero start to appear for linux, everyone will abandon the free software projects and just go warez. Thoughts on a postcard to the usual address....

"Linux did ship with defective kernel...."
"error messages related to include/scsi/scsi.h & include/scsi/sg.h....."
"upgrade to Linux-2.6.8 or newer or remove /usr/src/linux..........."
" dynamic linker on Linux does not work correctly............................"
"Until this is fixed it makes no sense to switch to libc.so.7..............."
"Linux kernels past 2.0.30 will probably already have this patch included................................"

what the hack is that,I even had to convert my atapi cdrom into scsi ones !Even if it is all true and workable,mind you,can I trust my blank cdrom or DVD to linux "kernel" (at least i sounded abstract enough for the linux hacker,try talking about "NT kernel" to MS users including those hardcore professional ones).Linux is free,but burning blank roms on my "XP" is definately cheaper.Agree?:rolleyes:

Re: Nero for Linux
 

Is that... Motif?
Ew.

--L*F

I don't know exactly if this is the answer you are looking for, but it seems to me you are asking about what desktop API (or whatever is that you call it) they are using. It that is the case, it uses some not-so-updated version of GTK, I think. Perhaps he screenshots are themed too. Who knows?

My 2 cents... it's like the same thing when Symantec released PCAnywhere for Linux. So it's true, VNC does the same thing possibly better, so that means we won't use it. But if someone does need to use it, it'll be there for him and not be an obstacle in his Linux path. As well, at least it shows willingness of software vendors to acknowledge and develop for the new movement to Linux.

I agree with you completely. That is exactly the point of all this. Even when it is not OSS, the fact that vendors are taking Linux into account is notable. I wouldn't be surprised if we see Macromedia or Adobe products for Linux sometime in the future.

See a related thread here: http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...hreadid=300802

I am with you on that one. I was about to place an order when I noticed that. Why not do a cheap "test the waters" release rather than that ?

Who wants Nero anyway? I went there too, to find out and my last nero version was 5 from 2 years ago. I have 3 Linux gui burning tools which i never use anyway. Why? they are just too cumbersome and slow. Use the cli its quicker and easier which is one of the reasons I love my Linux system.

Yeah, I do that too for some things actually. But I was curious about the DVD burning capacities...:D

Well, it looks a lot like acroread 5.x to me (which is Motif if I'm not mistaken). In any case, it is ugly. K3B is a lot more pleasant to look at, and it's OSS, so I'm sticking to it.
--L*F

On Windows, Nero offers a very, very nice complete DVD authoring suite, and K3b still only begins to scrape the functionality of the Nero suite.

Absolutely. I don't understand why people so insist on pretty multicolored interfaces for their apps. Does it add to the productivity, perhaps? They are just front-ends to the same old command-line tools, like cdrtools, growisofs and dvd-rw tools. TkDVD is a pretty good option for those so in love with point-and-click features.

( What times are we coming to? A DVD authoring suite!) :D
I doubt whether the crossover version can perform stuff all that well. It's still dependent on many windows-specific API. Is there a legitimate reason why people should be enthused by this?

Absolutely. I don't understand why people so insist on pretty multicolored interfaces for their apps. Does it add to the productivity, perhaps? They are just front-ends to the same old command-line tools, like cdrtools, growisofs and dvd-rw tools. TkDVD is a pretty good option for those so in love with point-and-click features.

The pretty interface makes the overall user experience more enjoyable.. Face it, even if a lot of people here love the CLI, you can hardly say the majority of PC users worldwide prefer a CLI over a simple, colourful GUI.

Oh, and Nero obviously has finally realised that there is such a thing as a Linux user...


( What times are we coming to? A DVD authoring suite!) :D
I doubt whether the crossover version can perform stuff all that well. It's still dependent on many windows-specific API. Is there a legitimate reason why people should be enthused by this?

Agreed. Nero for Linux will never be as good as the Windows version (which I actually love - it's very powerful once you get over the original "SmartStart" junk) without a dedicated team of developers, or without letting out the current source onder GPL and letting the community develop it.


I applaud Nero's move, but they need to think it through just a bit more. I would have prefered no Nero for Linux over a half-assed attempt.

Sure it does, and X does a great job at that. But I still think the reason why most users prefer GUI's, is the fear of the Command Line. Most users see it as a tool from the medieval times and have a strong dislike for it.
The CLI is not just a play thing of the über-geek, but anybody wishing to get the best out of their system should use it. This is the beauty of the GNU/Linux system. Both X and the console coexist amicably and provide a more powerful system to work with. It's a point that many overlook, but actually is the key to GNU/Linux's success.

Using a GUI is easier on your memory. No command and switches to remember (most people are not keen on pesky details), just buttons which remind you of the available functions.

GUI also often embed logic, making it impossible to use incompatible or incoherent option combination (that's when it's properly done of course). When command line apps do the same, you have typed everything, commited and then you get an error message and it's back to the drawing board. When you add that most people do typos....

CLI is quicker, just like it's quicker to book a plane ticket with an attendant than doing it online on a site you've never used. To the difference than everyone knows how to speak but you have to learn the CLI.

Yeah but you try authoring a DVD from command line! At somepoint you gotta have a gooey...

That may be the case for a lot of people, I will agree with you on that point. But personally, I use both. For some things, the CLI is better. For others, the GUI can be quicker and more efficient. I have no fear of the CLI. I know how to use it and I do use it often. With Linux, it's all about choice and the best tool for the job. :)

Oh my god, try designing a DVD menu from the command line.
No, not just a simple 3x3 table. Check out any commercial DVD and look at the menu.

Now, design the images from the command line.
Arrange them in your menu from the command line. Be sure to get the gradient just right, and the graduated alpha blending where desired. From the command line.

Six months from now you'll still be trying to tweak your images to get them just right, and I'll have completed the DVD menu months earlier using either Photoshop or The Gimp and Nero (unfortunately, probably Nero on Windows) or Ulead DVD Workshop.

The same can be said for CAD, 3D rendering, nonlinear video editing, web development, web BROWSING (I suppose you prefer Lynx, right? Do you use Lynx to browse this site? Hey mods, please post bornhj "I hate GUI"'s user agent for all to mock^H^H^H^Hadmire the Mozilla or Firefox or possibly even MSIE user agent!), and so forth. Yeah, you can edit html using vi, pico, ed, etc. but isn't Quanta Plus so much nicer, and doesn't it save you s(bleep)loads of time?

There is a value to command line: that is, mainly automation of routine tasks and scheduling via crond, macros (more automation but generally tied to a button), nightly builds (yes, more automation!), and the like. Need to get actual work done - quickly? That is what the GUI is for. Not all tasks are sysadmin-oriented.

Can't you even see right? Crediting my post to bornhj!

Why the hell should I? I don't need to.

Actually, I use a CAD-CAM machine to plot machine designs, with dedicated programs hardwired in the machine ( I'm an aerospace engineer) . And that, runs on a dedicated OS, not Linux, not Windows. Also 3d rendering, non-linear video editing and autoimated adaptive progressive rendering stuff I do on a Silicon Graphics machine.
All GNU tools work best from the command line.And these are the most important pieces of code on your system.So yeah, I don't trust them in the hands of a GUI. For sysadmin purposes, you gotta use the console.

Oh, and I'm such a hopeless moron that I can't understand why you need GUI for apps. Perhaps you didn't care to read my later posts. The linux system is based on text files. Why do you so jump out of your pants and wax eloquent about GUI's and MS Windows?

Yes but dvd authoring isnt sysadmin work is it? No-one in their right mind would attempt to author a dvd using the command line - its going to be quicker using a gui any day, specifically because there are some proceses that require screen alignment and graphical placing of objects such as buttons etc. I'm not sure why this argument exists. No-one is trying to develop a dvd-authoring package that uses the command line. I would certainly love to see a nero equivalent on linux but it should be open source. Because ahead have failed to do this (and I'm sure licensing isnt the only reason behind it) I shall continue to use k3b to burn cds and dvds and reboot into windows to author dvds.

not to mention burning a data cdof your favorite mp3s and choosing exactly what files are to be chosen is much more tedious on a commandline.

When I burn ISOs and folders of data, command line. If I am making an MP3 cd for my car--no way I'd ever use a CLI.

1. There already is a macromedia flash player for linux

2. Why would adobe need to create something like adobe acrobat reader professional for linux? You can already create pdf files using OpenOffice.org. Would OO.org then have to pay royalties (or something similar) to adobe? Since there already is at least 3 linux programs that read and edit pdf files, I don't see why we need an adobe acrobat version.

because it's not the same thing... you are fooling yourself if you think that the functionality provided by free software projects is the same as what adobe's propietary solutions provide...

i think it would be great if in the future you could get adobe pro or studio and stuff like that for linux, it would be a sign that the linux desktop has finally stopped being a little blip on the IT radar, and the mothership has landed...

Well I've found that both gv and KDE's PDF viewers do not handle alpha blending well (read: at all) with embedded PNG files, and OOo does not create complex PDF files correctly when using alpha blending - I thought at first that Linux was vastly superior to Windows when it comes to PDF support only to discover that Adobe's apps still reign supreme - which is to be expected since it's their "standard"

Linux stopped being a blip on the IT radar a long time ago win32sux. Its still a blip on the desktop radar however. Dont worry, Adobe recently advertised for linux developer positions. The blip is growing.....

Kim: Not my post :P Quit poking fun at me because I like Firefox. And I'm sure DVD authoring at a CLI is hard. I can only imagine.

I love my GUI and can't live without it, but I'm not scared of the command line if I have to use it.

Well, it is foolhardy to create pdf's using Open Office (foolhardy coz u throw a lot of options outta the window). It's always wise to create pdf's from tex files.(Nothing better than Texmacs for journal reports) Graphics are easy to handle with the figure environment.
Of course, Adobe's software would produce better creations. But, I dunno, even pdf's formatted using Arobat seem to lack in the graphics department. Maybe it's just me,I guess.

I didn't say there wasn't any Macromedia or Adobe product for linux. Macromedia has the flash player and Adobe the Acrobat Reader. But both have a lot more products than these two or any few others they might offer. To my knowledge none of the following have linux versions: Premiere, Photoshop, Acrobat Pro, Dreamweaver, Fireworks, ColdFusion (or the complete MM Studio MX). That's a lot more products than the mere "viewers" they offer.

Besides, OpenOffice.org is great, but Acrobat Pro is better. It lets you print to PDF, while OO.org just creates PDF's out of its documents. I have also noticed that OO.org PDF's are noticeably bigger than Acrobat's, with the same quality.

**********

But what about creating a PDF from something already in another format? I am not only thinking in my documents. Suppose you have a really big and highly formatted M$ Word document you want to store or distribute in PDF format. How would you do? Will you rewrite it completely? Guess not.

if all of you are planning to develop a NERO make sure it is OPEN SOURCE or else no one will use it!!!!!!!! sorry guys!!!!!!! but open source is a free software!!!!!!!

actually, "open source software" is not synonymous with "FREE software"...

http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-s...r-freedom.html

i have it it really sux it's ugly and optionless use k3b before it anyday!

I see some problems here. First of all, as mentioned, NeroLINUX seem to require that you already have Nero 6.0. Also, you guys talks about how K3B does the job and that you don't need Nero.

But what about us guys who does not have Windows and no Nero, and that does not use KDE? I don't like that when I like a program I need to have Windows, or when it is a Linux program I need to have KDE. Please remove that "you need to have". :P

k3b works in any X environment, no? if not, that's weird, because most KDE apps i have will work in any environment i try it in. i know i use gnome apps in kde and kde apps in gnome with no issues.

you should be able to use K3B if you use X. Or at least I think, I can't test it as I am not at my house and this machine is doze... :cry:

Of course I can make it work, but that requires that I install all the KDE libraries. There is a reason why I don't use KDE, one of them is that I don't like to spend my harddrive on KDE. I would like to see that more programs are written more for Linux and less for KDE/Gnome. Because I like that you can choose how your Linux system should be set up, and I choose not to install KDE.

ok, that makes sense. even so, unless you are really hurting for disk space, i like to have different desktop managers installed just for testing purposes. it's pretty helpful for troubleshooting if nothing else.

I, too, have multiple DE installed. My primary DE is Xfce4, but I also have Gnome and KDE installed. All my apps run fine under Xfce4.

I do wish things were written more for GNU/Linux + X, and not for Gnome/KDE. Although both are great projects and their respective teams have done some amazing work, it does kind of go against the philosophy of choice and a modular O/S. It would be nice if there were a standard GUI library that all DE worked off of. But that's just the nature of the GNU/Linux beast.

Personally, I prefer working in XFCE4 because its light, but still looks good. Everything seems to run faster under XFCE4. Plus, it tries to stick to the Free Desktop standards. It also uses XML for its config files, so they are easy to edit by hand if you want to. I think everything should use XML for config files and save files. XML fits with the GNU/Linux philosophy perfectly. While GNU/Linux is a set of open standards and tools to build an OS, XML is a open standard for building file formats. There is a great article about it the first issue of Free Software Magazine. I suggest giving it a read. :)

Oh man, this forum is excellent!! I find everything here.

Now back to Nero. Someone wrote here that k3b is great, it is. But Nero is much easier. And as an interesting comparison, XPDF is cool too, but the acrobat 7.0 is great and i am about to put it on my linux box. Let's hope they keep coming out with more stuff for Linux. :D

i will comment on some technical advantage that has nerolinux relative to k3b and that seems to be unnoticed by most reviews, and is that k3b won't work if there is no enough space in the hd to create the ISO filesystem, while nerolinux seems to pipe the filesystem directly from the session editor into the burning API. Im not sure if this can be done with the cdrecord-genre of burners, but i would be happy to be shown wrong

Sorry to resurrect a dead thread, but, I have a comment on why I love Nero:

I burn needle-drops of vinyl albums, and i can put in side one and two as waves, and look at the files visually to mark where the tracks are within the program, and it will split up the two sides into the tracks I've made. K3B still doesn't do that, and I only know the wavsplitter program that will do that.

I now have two run two seperate programs to do what I could have in Nero, plus there is all the writing back and forth on the hd, space, etc. Nero takes the original and does it.

I have also narrowed a stereo mix to mono in Nero quickly when I was making our wedding music cds... all things you can do with other programs, but it was built right in to Nero.

I am still considering running my nero with wine, make iso's, and then just burn those. Too many things going on for that at the moment....

Interesting. This is the complete opposite for me. When I boot into MS it's a system that I didn't pay for. Someone else I work for did. When I boot into Linux it's a system I paid for. I've paid more for Linux than I was ever willing to pay for MS. Go Figure.

If I would insult you I would a)probably be kicked out of the LQ Site and b)confirm your presumptions.

Who would be the stupid one then? Me! Having said that I should go on with my post and not offend you (promise I'll try :) )

You say it's the quality of the software that interests you. Fine with me, but have you ever thought that the fact that a certain application is open source can have a big impact on quality. It's true that 90% of the users dont's know what source code is, not to mention looking at it. Still there is the 10% that downloads the source code and maybe decide to change a thing or two to make the app better. And who can better improve the app than it's users who know what they want. No open source means less user interference.

I dare you. Try to develop an application and never accept user proposals. Let's see how long you last on the market.

You say you understand some people don't have the financial capabilities to buy software. Why would I pay 1 cent for an application if I can get a better one for free and If I'm satisfied with it I will certainly shout out loud "SUPPORT OPEN SOURCE". It saved me 1 cent. Why would I be selfish and hide that app from the public.

O and here's a thing you would like Get Firefox!

Regarding Nero.
Never used any linux CD-burning software, but having nero for Linux is a good step forward. Companies have seen value in linux. And aside from that nero is hell a easy to use