Guest Report Share Posted March 19, 2005 Just a quick comment, but even linux has a .net framework... Mostly because .net has some unique abilities that should be used without the bias against MS getting in the way... Nothing could be farther from the truth - Linux is the kernel only and DOES NOT require .NET. Linux is written in Ansi C. Not C++, Not C# or any other version of C. If it was you couldn't compile the kernel without a Microsoft based OS or the .NET libraries. A common misconception people make about Linux is that it is the OS environment which it is not - Linux is just the kernel. I can't speak for the others who would rather not have .NET but I will speak for myself. I run a customized Windows 2000 system (I have no need to upgrade the OS - and will have no need for the forseeable future) with much of the excess removed with nLite - IE removed, excess services removed, etc. CDBurner XP Pro in its current state 3.0.116 fits well within this environment unlike most commercial products. The newer version will require me to install the .NET framework which is over 2 times larger (the archived distribution) than the application (CDBurnerXP Pro) that will make use of it. I'll continue to use version 3.0.116 as CDBurnerXP Pro is very good software. I cant see how much benefit version 3.5 will give me over 3.0.116 which would justify installing close to 100MB of .NET libraries. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest another Guest... Report Share Posted March 31, 2005 Just to add some remarks to the discussion: 1. There is not only C, C++ and C#, but there is also C99 and even a C-- or Cmm, see http://people.ku.edu/~nkinners/LangList/Langs/C/Cmm.htm 2. Java is not an interpreted language. Java source is compiled to platform independant bytecode. with old JREs this bytecode is "interpreted", with recent JREs this byte compiled just-in-time to machine code for fast execution. Perl is not an interpreted language either, at least not on Gnu/Linux where it also has a just-in-time compiler 3. A big advantage in choosing a language like Java would be portability. Luckily that is not necessary as other platforms have good open source burning tools (e.g. K3B for KDE). If somebody says, he could vomit on Java, he's never really got to work with it for a while. It doesn't need to be your favorite, but your opinion is obviously not professional. 4. If you're using an M$ operating system (this includes the most popular DOS btw.), why complain about a few MB more M$ software full of security issues? You have hundreds of it on your hard disk anyway. Don't worry, I'm using WinXP often enough as well (besides Debian GNU/Linux, SuSE Linux, Solaris 10 and FreeBSD). 5. I would personally recommend to make CD BurnerXP Open Source, as this usually speeds up development a lot and is more fun, too ... Its a great tool really. But it would be perfect, if it would include UDF etc. Greets - phaelicks Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zenel2 Report Share Posted April 2, 2005 "another Guest" wrote: If you're using an M$ operating system (this includes the most popular DOS btw.) NO. M$ killed its MS-DOS cca 1993 and does no longer maintain it since. There are other M$-Free DOSes available now. Will version 3.5 reduce the size of the installer from 13 MB down to 5 MB ? At the cost of need to install some 100 MB of this ".NET" waste ??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest another Guest... Report Share Posted April 2, 2005 NO. M$ killed its MS-DOS cca 1993 and does no longer maintain it since. There are other M$-Free DOSes available now. Well, I know there are and have been other ones, that's why I wrote "the most popular". It was just, because somebody said, he could get rid of MS by using DOS. But is that really a choice? For me that's at most an operating system for embedded PCs, but there are better solutions for that as well. By the way: Cmm (C--) seems to be called CEnvi now and is an interpreted (!) C-like scripting language. Also available for DOS And by the way: Writing a CD burning application in Java would be an interesting task, which would very likely have to include native code, making it not portable again. I wouldn't be suggesting such a task at all... But then, why do it in VB? If you are skilled enough to work with CD formats, hardware interfacing etc., you should be skilled enough to use a more powerful programming language (C/C++). But then, that's probably just my prejudices about VB... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Theriel Report Share Posted April 3, 2005 I asked about the date of publishing the new stable version, sb answered - March - but it has already ended and I still can't see this new version... Theriel Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
user9999 Report Share Posted April 4, 2005 Hi, I'm also very interested in the new release of CDBurnerXP Pro. March is ended an there are no news on the website. When exactly is the new release of 3.5? Torsten Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Altmenorg Report Share Posted April 5, 2005 Sincerely, we all are waiting, but as it's free, it'll be released "when finished", and I personnaly wouldn't like to be under pressure while spending my time developping for free if I where a developper... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest magoood Report Share Posted April 6, 2005 Hi Wanna ask... IF Joliet is currently supported in the latest version so why i can't burn files in my language(Arabic) - They appear 2 look like rubbish in the CD layout Doesn't Joliet mean mulilanguage support ?! Another Q: Cue format is the second important image format after iso format as i guess. Will version 3.5 come up with the ability to write CDs directly from this format or we will have 2 convert it 2 iso first ? THANKS for any answers Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
floele Author Report Share Posted April 6, 2005 At the moment we can only offer a small improve,ent in multilanguage support, and cue is not planned for the next version. You can only burn bin-files without a cue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest magoood Report Share Posted April 6, 2005 Thanks for the answer regarding the multilanguage support. I hope i can burn my files (in Arabic filenames) and they appear correctly in the layout and i can play/run them later after burning of course But regarding that i can burn the bin only, i am not sure how can this happen - i am so surprised about this sentence i thought that the cue file and the bin file are RELATED with each other and as a proof 4 this, i tried Nero right now and i tried 2 open a bin file thru it but as i expected, it gave me the message: Unexpected File Format so how can i neglect the cue file and if it can be neglected, what's the use from it ?! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
floele Author Report Share Posted April 6, 2005 They are related, but sometimes you can also burn bins without cues. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest New user Report Share Posted April 9, 2005 Great Software, don't go to Java, stay with VB.net Java is being eliminated slowly by Microsoft from Windows so Java guys you will nedd to rely on Sun and Java based companies releasing utilities for Windows - not good sense... Microsoft are rumoured to have .net dll's in built into parts of the XP service pack 3 updates so keep your XP box up to date. Would be good to copy CD to CD and DVD to DVD whatever they contained by using Absolute read and write, but that would mean accessing and using the controller chips direct but, too many on the market now. We used to do that in the early days of PC's to write data that could only be read if you knew it existed, and it was an early form of copy protection on CD's Keep up the good work. If you ever need a proper product tester who knows what hew is on about let me know via the forum. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Report Share Posted April 10, 2005 Been hovering over this project for a few weeks now. Sounds like a great collection to my freeware program lineup. v3.5 will have everything I'm looking for in a burner. Looking forward to it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWalker Report Share Posted April 10, 2005 The NET framework 1.1 is not 100+ meg, it's 24 meg (23696 KB). Just to be honest. "The .NET Framework version 1.1 redistributable package includes everything you need to run applications developed using the .NET Framework." From http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/deta ... aylang=en. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dsperbeck Report Share Posted April 10, 2005 Have you investigated what it is when uncompressed? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Océane Report Share Posted April 14, 2005 Hi, My french translation is ended! I'm waiting some news strings to complete it (Options Tab)! Salut tout le monde, Ma traduction est terminée. J'attends le reste du fichier dll pour finaliser celle-ci ! (Traduction des Options) a+ Colok http://www.gravurecity.net Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Report Share Posted April 15, 2005 I knew it! I said it would be about mid April. Will the next varsion be out any time soon, and will upgrades still be free? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest jbean Report Share Posted April 15, 2005 hmz i felt to react to the .Net discussion... Dwalker is right. Even installed and uncompressed, the .Net framework is not even close to a 100Mb. Furthermore what most people don't know or realise, the .Net framework has no influence whatsoever on system stability since it is sort of a giant 'wrapper' API around the OS. Therefore existing applications and OS functionality is not influenced at all. What the framework does is nothing more than offering an environment in which an application programmer can have access to OS functions in a better structured manner compared to the traditional win32 api. As a result of this, .Net applications are better maintainable and more easily understood. LoL, this sounds like a M$ commercial but it is not. I work with .Net however and for a change, i have become pretty positive about it. Gogo Flo imho you made the right choice .. Anxiously waiting for 3.5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
floele Author Report Share Posted April 15, 2005 I said it would be about mid April. I wouldn't be too sure. It may be May as well Gogo Flo imho you made the right choice .. Anxiously waiting for 3.5 Actually it wasn't my choice Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Report Share Posted April 16, 2005 salut a tous je me de mender s'il avais ume version en francais Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Report Share Posted April 16, 2005 hmz i felt to react to the .Net discussion... Dwalker is right. Even installed and uncompressed, the .Net framework is not even close to a 100Mb. Then why the claim for 110MB HDD space for .NET Redistributable on Microsoft's OWN web site? http://msdn.microsoft.com/netframework/ ... fault.aspx 210 files installed. This isn't to mention the ungodly number of registry entries it will create as well. 4,177 entries in HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT 10 entries in HKEY_CURRENT_USER 219 entries in HKEY_CURRENT_MACHINE 40 entries in HKLM_SYSTEM under ASP.NET for a grand total of 4,446 additional lines in the registry. Do your research before you babble about how "lite" .NET Framework is - it's all on Microsoft's own web site. This seems like an awful lot to install for a couple of "features". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Report Share Posted April 17, 2005 We are currently working on the next version, 3.5. As you should know from the news, this one is a complete rewrite (again) of the application for .NET framework. Apart from the rewrite, there are also many other new features. A first alpha version for the donors will be released soon A few infos: - 50% smaller installer (5MB) - disc-to-disc copy - dual layer support - fixes most known issues of version 3.0.116 - multilanguage-support (finally) - XML-based project files (so that you can easily create your own ones) when can we see a public version? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Report Share Posted April 17, 2005 I am THE UNDERTAKER!!!! 13-0 at WM. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Report Share Posted April 18, 2005 when does the final comes out, iam waiting since last year damn it ^^ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Report Share Posted April 22, 2005 when does the final comes out, iam waiting since last year damn it ^^ If Flo knows, she either can't or won't say. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.