Slashdot Mirror
NeroLinux vs. K3b
An anonymous reader writes "Flexbeta.net compares NeroLinux to K3b under Fedora Core 3. The review notices how NeroLinux does nothing with the eye candy while K3b's GUI is no comparison to NeroLinux. The article also mentions how cumbersome it is to navigate through NeroLinux, also taking note of how long each application takes to accomplish burning tasks."
not much good if it doesn't mirror anything beyond the first page of the article.
world--
If Ahead had released NeroLinux 2 or 3 years ago, there would have been a maket for it. At that time there were no easy to use GUI CD/DVD burner apps for linux. Today K3b has the user base that would care for a "nero for linux".
Do not underestimate the power of Brand recognition.
People moving over from Windows will see the name and know what they are getting.
Lack of options is only a problem for those of us who bother with fussing around.
Most people want to simply create a cd.
liqbase
I agree with your conclusion - K3B > NeroLinux. However, one wouldn't criticize their newly-born child for not being able to run like his years-older brother. See this for what is is - more Linux support from predominantly MS Windows-based vendors.
Stuck down a hole! In the middle of the night! With an owl!
I would surmise the purpose of NeroLinux is to give an alternative to platform switchers so they can use somthing similar to their Windows product. It would a be a prudent move for Nero to keep their base for the cost of doing the parallel development. A better comparison would be between the Windows version and the Linux version from a user's standpoint.
"God fights on the side with the best artillery." - Napoleon, Marshal of France - speaking truth to power
The reason they want users to buy windows version to use nerolinux is simple. They don't want to go through the effort of making a new scheme to prevent piracy. Instead of having separate buy linux version and buy windows version things with different keys and such. They will just sell keys. You can even think of it as you're not buying the windows version. You're buying a key from ahead that lets you use either version. Also, this way people who already have a windows key can get the linux version for free.
You crazy people think too much into this.
As for k3b and nero yeah, I can see the guys point. But the fact is that nero, unlike the open source burning tools on linux, works no matter what. And it takes advantage of features your burner may have if say, its a fancy plextor. Also, for some things the linux software just doesn't do it. Like mastering and burning video DVDs, in linux there is no easy tool.
Neros advantage is that it works, period. If you think that k3b works period with a full featureset on all hardware then feel free to peruse any distro mailing lists and forums for people who can't get burning to work. Especially of DVDs.
The GeekNights podcast is going strong. Listen!
I doubt the reason is because of CD burning in windows. K3b is merely a frontend for the command line tools cdrecord and cdrdao, and both have been ported to Windows.
It's probably not on windows for the same reason that hardly any other KDE/QT apps are on windows. And that reason escapes me, I always assumed it's was a Trolltech QT licensing issue (which shouldn't be a problem anymore). Why is it that Gaim is available in windows but K3b is not? Why is openoffice available, but not koffice? I think this hurts the KDE apps quite a bit. GTK is getting much more coverage in windows.
1st - this isn't about the article submitted to Slashdot. This is more a response to individual comments that I've seen posted here so far and across the internet: As I've used open source products, I keep seeing the same old arguments. One of those arguments is that we need commercial developers for Linux. Lo and behold when a commercial developer ante's up and makes product for Linux - they are beat up for their decision. Suddenly we hear about the commercial software: 1. That's fine but it isn't open sourced. 2. Bahhh we have an opensource equivalent already. 3. It doesn't work on my weird (read low marketshare) version of Linux. I'm sure there are other reasons, but it is early. Why can't we be positive? Why can't we embrace Ahead for their efforts and simply say - Good Job on your (read) 1st version? I'm sure if they didn't get bad press and beat up over their decision, there might be 'future' versions. Also, for all you 'we need to convert the windows world' - having NERO available is like a warm familiar blanket to many windows users. Don't worry ppl - other developers read slashdot - and they are probably thinking - why even bother to develop for the platform when they are likely to get negative press for their effort. Remember, it's not about comparison to existing free as beer linux apps - this is a commercial prodcut that will live or die on it's own merits.
Neros advantage is that it works, period. If you think that k3b works period with a full featureset on all hardware then feel free to peruse any distro mailing lists and forums for people who can't get burning to work. Especially of DVDs.
So if K3b works on all my systems (and it does), then Nero really doesn't have an advantage at all, does it? I don't really give a crap if Joe-Bob on the Debian list can't get K3b to work; for me, it works, period.
There are some of us happy enough with mkisofs and cdrecord :]
So I think the MS zealot modders are out, for this to be deemed insightful.
So you explains why they want us Linux users to buy a Windows version. OK, well, a lot of vocal people whine about installation woes on Linux, you just added one harder way to install software on Linux. Given the difficulty of installing NeroLinux on Linux, even I would not install it (I say even I because my custom Linux is based on LFS, you know what that means ? I can endure a lot).
And then you say "you crazy people think too much into this" ? I wonder who is the crazy one. You say we are crazy for not wanting to go through all of this, when K3B comes with any distro ?
And you should not do astroturfing, you are very bad at it.
Unlike what you say, K3B WORKS no matter what. That means if you have no recognised driver for your burner, no device, no I do-not-know what, K3B will still work, you will still be able to do ISO. But I will not lie like you did, and say that it will burn the CD when you are in any of the situation I described. Actually, there is an option in latest Linux 2.6 kernels preventing you from burning when non-root. I'm pretty sure NeroLinux can not bypass that. K3B can't.
When people who can't burn on the forums like you said, that is not because of K3B, but I see your red herring quite well. It's easily dismissed, I can tell you to go see the forums for people that can not burn on Windows (or lose a lot of CD, like I did on Windows), there are far more.
I know 10+ clueless users, they could not burn with Nero (too complicated), they can barely with K3B (still sometimes asking me if they should create audio CD or data CD), so I know K3B is more usable. But you would want them to master and burn VIDEOs ?!! I guess you slipped to the case of the power user on purpose, thinking we would not notice.
Then, as we are in the case of power user, let me tell you there are several well known mastering and burning tool for DVDs on Linux. Mastering a DVD is not an easy task, or if it is, then you talk about very simple mastering. I can tell you then that dvdrip on Linux is more than enough for that task. If your argument is that K3B does not integrate that, then I understand even more why K3B is more usable : it is a burning tool, and only a burning tool. DVDRip include the burning mastering anyway.
3 years of using K3B tells me it just works, and you, with some weeks of NeroLinux, you dare tell me it just works ?!!!
I can never understand you arrogant people, calling us crazy.
First off, I'm not a K3b person or a Nero person. I'm actually a console mp3burn user.
I've used K3b in the past and I must say that it's a very formidible opponent to go up against. I don't have a Nero CD key so I have to go with what everyone else is saying about NeroLinux.
I think it's great that we're finally getting some commercial Linux software, corporate people don't care whether K3b is "better," they just want brand recognition. So now we have some brand reccognition. If Nero gets positive feedback from this, other companies will be likely to follow. If we can prove to Nero that Linux is a viable platform to develop for, they'll keep at it. RMS probably doesn't like this, but it needs to happen.
If we can give the people what they think they want (brand recognition), we can influence them. E.g. if J.Random Windows User goes to buy EasyToInstallAndUseLinux 1.0 and NeroLinux and perhaps even WordPerfectLinux (sometime in the future), he'd be set. Now, say that ETIAULinux comes with KDE and K3b and J.RWU discovers it one day, likes it, and uses it as his default burning program.
That's what we'll have to do: lure them with commercial software and win them over with opensource.
Nero is asking the user to give up their software freedom in addition to providing a more clumsy UI and charging money for all of this. It's perfectly fair to compare Nero to K3B, just as countless people compare OpenOffice.org to Microsoft Windows or the GIMP to Adobe Photoshop (and never hesitate to point out how the proprietary alternatives are "better" by some standard that usually doesn't include software freedom).
Nero is not providing "Linux[sic] support", they are using the free software community as a market, not contributing to it.
Digital Citizen