Need opinions of Roxio vs Nero.

Check out the forums at www.cdfreaks.com and www.cdrlabs.com. Quite a
number of people are having problems with Nero's latest release. One person
even noted they went back to Roxio 'cause Nero 6 was soooooo bad.

Nero has the advantage in that they are constantly updating and fixing the
software. However, Roxio has been more responsive in their updates.
Additionally, they have an extensive forum where you can find a lot of
help - something that Nero is greatly lacking in.

"quite a number of people" and "one person" do not make much of a trend.
With the Updates today the program is solid, although I have not used every
app in the package.

Seems like a pretty nice package to me and NeroVision Express 2 is a nice
DVD package.

Jack


"Big Dog" wrote in message
news
Check out the forums at www.cdfreaks.com and www.cdrlabs.com. Quite a
number of people are having problems with Nero's latest release. One
person
even noted they went back to Roxio 'cause Nero 6 was soooooo bad.

Nero has the advantage in that they are constantly updating and fixing the
software. However, Roxio has been more responsive in their updates.
Additionally, they have an extensive forum where you can find a lot of
help - something that Nero is greatly lacking in.

Thanx for the reply.

"Bearclaw" wrote in message
.com...

.. ---------------------------------
cRoxio / Acraptec

Trashy company that picks Trashes
as its beta testers
---------------------------------

Big Dog wrote:

Additionally, they have an extensive forum where you can find a lot of
help - something that Nero is greatly lacking in.

Because Easy CD CreMator sure needs extensive help while Nero doesn't.

Nero has the advantage in that they are constantly updating and fixing the
software. However, Roxio has been more responsive in their updates.

Like this?

================================================== =======
Roxio, What a Joke (FRAUD) - "0.9x" DAE Speed Bug Returns
================================================== =======

cRoxio, what's the excuse now? Was it Microsoft, El Nino or God?

================================================
From: smh
Subject: TEAC W552E EZCD6
Date: 5/4/03

Are there any reported issues with the above ?
I'm having bad audio extraction rates (i.e. x1) reported.

Don't tell me the infamous "0.9x" DAE Speed bug returned!

============================
Mike Richter is a LIAR (dae)
============================

Easy Coaster Creator 4.0 was released with the following bug:

Major bugs fixed in 4.02 (in 3/00, 7 months after its release):

System Tests for Digital Audio Extraction. Copying audio tracks from
CD to hard disk or CD-R gave much slower results in version 4 than
version 3.x for some CD-ROM drives, so with some systems it was
impossible to copy audio tracks directly from CD to CD-R.

[ In plain language, the System Tests gives "0.9x" as the DAE speed
of most, if not all, CD drives. (Acraptec tacitly acknowledged
that ALL IDE CD drives were affected by the bug.) ]

The reason why Ezcd 4.0 was released with such a bug is this:
=======================
From: Adrian Miller (Acraptec)
Subject: Acraptec Gibberish 101 and === More LIES ===
Date: 4/7/00

The DAE issue did not show up until after shipping of 4.00.
During beta testing all the testers reported DAE speeds in 4.00
similar to what they got in 3.5c.
======================

The beta testers did not discover the bug despite having a "significant"
beta program:
======================
From: Mike Richter
Subject: EZ Creator 4. 0 - True it has MAJOR bugs ?
Date: 9/2/99

They had a significant beta program ...
=====================

Imagine having a "significant" beta program, yet cannot even find an
'impossible not to detect' bug!

[ See the end why it's an 'impossible not to detect' bug.]

Mikey Richter's weasel excuses why beta test did not find the bug a

======================
From: Mike Richter
Subject: ****ty Beta Testing at Roxio-Adaptec
Date: 4/6/02

What is the point of beta testing at all
if you do not use representative sample of burners in use.

Not all beta testers use Plextors or SCSI, but while I was testing
for them, many of us did. In general, beta test is for functionality
rather than diversity - that is, the company wants competence in
determining and reporting performance, not variety of hardware.
Hardware testing requires many drives, firmware versions,
motherboards and so on. It is generally done by the manufacturer
(alpha level) because they have the hardware.

======================
From: Mike Richter (cRoxio Shill)
Subject: ****ty Beta Testing at Roxio-Adaptec
Date: 4/7/02

... beta testing is used to find hw
incompatibilities as well. It just strikes me as odd that a
significant problem with ide dae could get pass any
reasonably diligent testing program.

Beta testing finds whatever the testers turn up. Given the variety of
hardware on which CD recording depends, that means that compatibility
per se is examined at alpha or through public beta. AFAIK, neither
Adaptec in the past nor Roxio more recently has ever conducted a
public beta. With a manageable base of external testers, there's
little hope of turning up hardware incompatibilities so the
publisher does whatever it manages at the alpha level.
======================

What a weasel mumbo jumbo Mikey spins!

The fact is one beta tester, GMAN, was using a cd-rom that a user
reported getting the "0.9x" DAE:

======================
From: (GMAN)

i have been using a Panasonic 24x scsi drive...
[ I had approx 8x DAE ]
======================
From: jerry r

EZ creator 4 tests show my [Panasonic] CDr508 [24x] scsi drive
at .9x for DAE.
======================

( Is it possible the same drive gets "0.9x" on one system while
it gets "8x" on another system? See: "GMAN is a LIAR" )

Regardless whether beta test is only for functionality and not for
hardware incompatibility, this bug is 'impossible' to miss:

=======================
From: Adrian Miller (Acraptec)
Subject: smh is wasting bandwidth again
Date: 4/14/00

the program insists that [System] tests are run on drives
when it is first run...
=======================

System Tests has to be run when Ezcd is first used! That is, hardware
testing is forced.

Mikey Richter's weasel excuse that beta testing did not find the
"impossible not to detect" bug because beta testing is not for hardware
incompatibility is an unadulterated, unmitigated LIE (FRAUD).

----------------------------
Mikey, you are a Lying Scum!
----------------------------

================================================

Nero 6.0.0.11 has some bugs. See postings in Ahead forum at CDRLabs,

InCD 4.* still changes the file's date when copying a file. With Nero 5.*,
one could revert to InCD 3.5.24.0 and avoid this problem.
InCD 3.5.24.0 will not work with Nero 6.

I'm sticking with Nero 5.5.10.42, InCD 3.5.24.0 and Easy Write Reader
1.0.1.0 until I see evidence that Nero 6, etc. is fixed.

Note that if you purchased Nero 5.5 AFTER 30 April 2003, you should be able
to register for a free upgrade to Nero 6, check for details at www.nero.com.
So, if you can find a copy, you might consider purchasing Nero 5.5. Search
at www.pricegrabber.com, and your favorite online vendor, such as
www.provantage.com, to see who is still selling Nero 5.5.

--
http://www.standards.com/; Howard Kaikow's web site.
------------------------------------------------
"Big Dog" wrote in message
news
Check out the forums at www.cdfreaks.com and www.cdrlabs.com. Quite a
number of people are having problems with Nero's latest release. One
person
even noted they went back to Roxio 'cause Nero 6 was soooooo bad.

Nero has the advantage in that they are constantly updating and fixing the
software. However, Roxio has been more responsive in their updates.
Additionally, they have an extensive forum where you can find a lot of
help - something that Nero is greatly lacking in.

Nevada -

I agree that Nero 6 is a nice package. It appears from a number of sites
(user comments on CNET's review of Nero 6, CD Freaks and CD Labs) that the
first the initial release of ver 6 is very green.

The biggest downside of Nero/Ahead is their lack of support. The only
support is via e-mail, and a response may take a week or so.

SMH - have you even tried Nero 6?

FYI, I've got the demo running on a test machine. It has some advantages
over Roxio. However, the two biggest disadvantages right now are that 1.
the program is VERY green - certain portions are still in BETA. 2.
Inadequate tech support.

Hell this asshole never even owned the Adaptec/Roxio s/w he's gone
psychotic over these last Four Years...

Tim K

"Big Dog" wrote in message
...
SMH - have you even tried Nero 6?

FYI, I've got the demo running on a test machine. It has some
advantages
over Roxio. However, the two biggest disadvantages right now are that
1.
the program is VERY green - certain portions are still in BETA. 2.
Inadequate tech support.

Usenet Abuse - Continuing Stalking, Harassment and Libel





Additional references to portals that have recently banned this
psychotic for Stalking and Harassment should you require additional
information.










Path:
sn-us!sn-xit-06!sn-xit-08!supernews.com!newsfeed.news2me.com!newsfeed2.e
asynews.com!newsfeed1.easynews.com!easynews.com!ea synews!c03.atl99!news.
webusenet.com!pc01.webusenet.com!fe07.atl2.webusen et.com.POSTED!not-for-
mail
Message-ID:
From: smh
Organization: -
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: alt.comp.periphs.cdr
Subject: Need opinions of Roxio vs Nero.
References:

Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 159
X-Complaints-To:
X-Abuse-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint
properly.
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 02 Aug 2003 23:58:44 EDT
Date: Sat, 02 Aug 2003 21:07:24 -0700
Xref: sn-us alt.comp.periphs.cdr:396480


"smh" wrote in message
...
. ---------------------------------
cRoxio / Acraptec

Trashy company that picks Trashes
as its beta testers
---------------------------------

Big Dog wrote:

Additionally, they have an extensive forum where you can find a lot
of
help - something that Nero is greatly lacking in.

Because Easy CD CreMator sure needs extensive help while Nero doesn't.

Nero has the advantage in that they are constantly updating and
fixing the
software. However, Roxio has been more responsive in their updates.

Like this?

================================================== =======
Roxio, What a Joke (FRAUD) - "0.9x" DAE Speed Bug Returns
================================================== =======

cRoxio, what's the excuse now? Was it Microsoft, El Nino or God?

================================================
From: smh
Subject: TEAC W552E EZCD6
Date: 5/4/03

Are there any reported issues with the above ?
I'm having bad audio extraction rates (i.e. x1) reported.

Don't tell me the infamous "0.9x" DAE Speed bug returned!

============================
Mike Richter is a LIAR (dae)
============================

Easy Coaster Creator 4.0 was released with the following bug:

Major bugs fixed in 4.02 (in 3/00, 7 months after its release):

System Tests for Digital Audio Extraction. Copying audio tracks
from
CD to hard disk or CD-R gave much slower results in version 4 than
version 3.x for some CD-ROM drives, so with some systems it was
impossible to copy audio tracks directly from CD to CD-R.

[ In plain language, the System Tests gives "0.9x" as the DAE speed
of most, if not all, CD drives. (Acraptec tacitly acknowledged
that ALL IDE CD drives were affected by the bug.) ]

The reason why Ezcd 4.0 was released with such a bug is this:
=======================
From: Adrian Miller (Acraptec)
Subject: Acraptec Gibberish 101 and === More LIES ===
Date: 4/7/00

The DAE issue did not show up until after shipping of 4.00.
During beta testing all the testers reported DAE speeds in 4.00
similar to what they got in 3.5c.
======================

The beta testers did not discover the bug despite having a
"significant"
beta program:
======================
From: Mike Richter
Subject: EZ Creator 4. 0 - True it has MAJOR bugs ?
Date: 9/2/99

They had a significant beta program ...
=====================

Imagine having a "significant" beta program, yet cannot even find an
'impossible not to detect' bug!

[ See the end why it's an 'impossible not to detect' bug.]

Mikey Richter's weasel excuses why beta test did not find the bug a

======================
From: Mike Richter
Subject: ****ty Beta Testing at Roxio-Adaptec
Date: 4/6/02

What is the point of beta testing at all
if you do not use representative sample of burners in use.

Not all beta testers use Plextors or SCSI, but while I was testing
for them, many of us did. In general, beta test is for
functionality
rather than diversity - that is, the company wants competence in
determining and reporting performance, not variety of hardware.
Hardware testing requires many drives, firmware versions,
motherboards and so on. It is generally done by the manufacturer
(alpha level) because they have the hardware.

======================
From: Mike Richter (cRoxio Shill)
Subject: ****ty Beta Testing at Roxio-Adaptec
Date: 4/7/02

... beta testing is used to find hw
incompatibilities as well. It just strikes me as odd that a
significant problem with ide dae could get pass any
reasonably diligent testing program.

Beta testing finds whatever the testers turn up. Given the variety
of
hardware on which CD recording depends, that means that
compatibility
per se is examined at alpha or through public beta. AFAIK, neither
Adaptec in the past nor Roxio more recently has ever conducted a
public beta. With a manageable base of external testers, there's
little hope of turning up hardware incompatibilities so the
publisher does whatever it manages at the alpha level.
======================

What a weasel mumbo jumbo Mikey spins!

The fact is one beta tester, GMAN, was using a cd-rom that a user
reported getting the "0.9x" DAE:

======================
From: (GMAN)

i have been using a Panasonic 24x scsi drive...
[ I had approx 8x DAE ]
======================
From: jerry r

EZ creator 4 tests show my [Panasonic] CDr508 [24x] scsi drive
at .9x for DAE.
======================

( Is it possible the same drive gets "0.9x" on one system while
it gets "8x" on another system? See: "GMAN is a LIAR" )

Regardless whether beta test is only for functionality and not for
hardware incompatibility, this bug is 'impossible' to miss:

=======================
From: Adrian Miller (Acraptec)
Subject: smh is wasting bandwidth again
Date: 4/14/00

the program insists that [System] tests are run on drives
when it is first run...
=======================

System Tests has to be run when Ezcd is first used! That is, hardware
testing is forced.

Mikey Richter's weasel excuse that beta testing did not find the
"impossible not to detect" bug because beta testing is not for
hardware
incompatibility is an unadulterated, unmitigated LIE (FRAUD).

----------------------------
Mikey, you are a Lying Scum!
----------------------------

================================================