Nero vs ImgBurn: Why is ImgBurn preferred?

[usually_quiet]

Ever since ImgBurn was released, members here have been praising it, and saying it is better for burning DVD video than Nero, but I have yet to hear an explanation as to why this is so.

I have been using Nero for a couple of years, and have had good results, as long as I used quality media. I have used ImgBurn too, and it's fine, but I haven't found anything I like more about it, other than the additional choices available for burn speed. Just curious as to what the other reasons its fans have for preferring ImgBurn.

[JohnnyBob]

I had no problem burning single layer DVDs with Nero and I burned quite a few. I switched to ImgBurn when I decided to start using DL discs, because Nero wouldn't burn them correctly. They would play on my computer's optical drive but not on my standalone DVD player. That's my main reason. Also ImgBurn makes it fairly easy to select a point in the movie for switching from the 1st to the 2nd layer (the layer break). That's important because a slight pause is usually involved. I believe there may also be other advantages of a technical nature with make ImgBurn more reliable, because the author is highly knowledgable in this area. For example I've heard that it's important to include certain padding when burning discs that were edited with DVD Shrink, and I think ImgBurn does so automatically. After you get over the initial hurdle, ImgBurn is also simple in design and easy to use. It's a matter of confidence, I suppose.

[guns1inger]

Imgburn is free, small, efficient, and burns DVD Video correctly.

Nero is bloated, not free (OK, you probably got the cut down version for free with your drive), contains 296 different parts that all do things I don't need in a very mediocre fashion, and butchers dual layer discs.

[AlanHK]

About the only time I would use Nero now is to make multi-session backup disks. ImgBurn can't do that yet.

ImgBurn is easier to configure and doesn't hide options deeply in nested cryptic subwindows.

I get tired of Nero's interminable series of popups when you want to do anything, and closing takes even longer than opening. Why can't "exit" just exit?

[redwudz]

I still use Nero for burning CD and DVD data discs with a compilation of files, but not much else. I have never used anything in the Nero suite but Nero Burning Rom. But you can't seem to get that as a separate program. Nero seems to try to do 'everything' and ends up doing none of it well. JMO.

ImgBurn is simple to set up and you don't have to 'reprogram' it or wade though several menus each time just to burn a disc. Which one performs better for burning DVD-5s? I can't tell, but ImgBurn is easier to use.

[lordsmurf]

Nero has been incapable of correctly burning single-layer DVDs (that have DVD-Video compliant data) since version 5.5. It could never do dual-layer DVDs correctly. It got more and more bloated, adding tons of crap not related to the burning process. In the process, the burning became as pathetic as earlier versions of Easy CD/DVD Creator (Roxio 5 was the worst).

ImgBurn, on the other hand, just works. No bloat, just burning, and done correctly.

[fritzi93]

Then there's the 32k gap between IFOs and BUPs. Blutach and r0lz discuss it here:

http://forum.digital-digest.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=45025

[smitbret]

I use Nero to burn to multiple DVDs at the same time (ImgBurn can't) and I've never had a problem with it, although they have always been single layer.

Nero has been incapable of correctly burning single-layer DVDs (that have DVD-Video compliant data) since version 5.5.

ImgBurn, on the other hand, just works. No bloat, just burning, and done correctly.

Sounds like you had a bad version and decided to just write it off for good. Nero has its buggy versions, but when I find one that works I never have a problem (currently 7.5.7.0).

I've never tried DL, but when I do, it will be with ImgBurn. It just "feels" like it works better. Maybe it's just because it gives you a running log of what's happening, so you always know how the burn is going, but I do have more faith in it than Nero.

[DereX888]

I use Nero to burn to multiple DVDs at the same time (ImgBurn can't) and I've never had a problem with it, although they have always been single layer.

Nero has been incapable of correctly burning single-layer DVDs (that have DVD-Video compliant data) since version 5.5.

ImgBurn, on the other hand, just works. No bloat, just burning, and done correctly.

Sounds like you had a bad version and decided to just write it off for good. Nero has its buggy versions, but when I find one that works I never have a problem (currently 7.5.7.0).

No.
Its the 'design' of this program what is bad from the start.
I tested latest Nero 8.0.3.0 and guess what: it still repeats i.e. the same fundamental flaw of not spacing out IFOs and its backups (thus they still end up in the same blocks - so whats the point of having backup file that supposed to be there *if* the sector with original IFO becomes damaged?) Makes you wonder, since the programmers of this horribly, horribly bloated mutant-software don't understand even a basic principle of a 10+ years old disc structure, what else they don't know?

Since the earliest Nero versions as far as I can remember none of the versions was ever 'complete', they all always had flaws here and there, sometimes more sometimes less, but were always flawed.
For God sake, Ahead couldn't even make it right to burn VCDs correctly for 5 years or more, Neros were cranking non-standard VCD discs until version 5.5 or 6 (IIRC), [s:f18aedd910]they got it right finally about when no one else had any interest in creating VCDs anymore[/s:f18aedd910] LOL (edit: apparently, according to jman98 below, they did NOT fix it as I thought, they only included proper CDi app at version 3 or 4...)

Nero is so popular only because it is included with almost every burner - kinda like Windows, people get it bundled with their computers and thats why they use it. But that doesn't make it any good.

[tinker]

I think you heard enough about Nero. I use it too, but only for single layer DVD, for DVD DL I use ImgBurn. The reason is the same everybody else complain about.
I newer had a problem with single layer DVD burned by Nero.
Lets not forget they are competing with Roxio, which has its own set of problems.
I agree, not to trust apps which try to do everything. This is the only one I owe and it was mainly to do data, at the beginning.

[jman98]

Then there's the 32k gap between IFOs and BUPs. Blutach and r0lz discuss it here:

http://forum.digital-digest.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=45025

Thank you for mentioning this. Why would someone care? Well, if your BUP and IFO are in the same block and that block goes bad, your DVD is unreadable. Throw it in the trash. Nero ignores directives to keep the BUP and IFO in different blocks and puts them many times in the same block. This saves space, which is good for ignorant users who might be trying to burn just barely more video than the disc can hold, but it defeats the purpose of having BUPs in the first place. BUPs exist so that the DVD can still be read if the original VOB is bad. Turning this redundancy into a single point of failure is bad. Nero also does some nasty things with VCD and SVCD that violate the standards for those formats, more with SVCD than VCD though. To get Fast Forward/Rewind to work on SVCD, they used a kludge that causes some players to be unable to "time jump" to specific parts of the video. In theory FF/REW and time jump should all work on SVCD, but Nero got tired of hearing people bitch about FF/REW not working, so they fixed it with a kludge that broke time jump. This was 5 or 6 years ago and as far as I know they have NEVER fixed the real problem that would allow all 3 to work. A few DVD players can play Nero burned SVCD discs and do FF/REW and time jump, but most DVD players can only do FF/REW on these SVCDS.

There are things I like and don't like about Nero, but in my opinion Roxio is even worse. Nero doesn't let you set the layer break on dual layer DVDs. DVD+R DL discs MIGHT work OK, depending on how they were made before burning with Nero. I don't know this for a fact, but given how Nero works, I would be very surprised if was possible to correctly burn a DVD-R DL disc with Nero.

I use Nero now only for burning Lightscribe labels, some CD-R copying, audio CDs and making data discs. The problems with DL burns and the packing of BUPs and IFOs into the same block is why many of us use ImgBurn now.

[dutchdummy]

I hate to be redundant, but it's important to show that the opinion is one-sided for a reason. Regardless of media, I have a nearly 100% success rate in burning DL media with ImgBurn. I've tried about a half dozen times to burn DL media with Nero and have not burned a readable disc yet. I still find Nero to be reliable for burning CDs and single layer DVDs though.

[MOVIEGEEK]

I haven't had Nero(v6) installed on my PC in over a year and I don't miss it.I only use Imgburn for DVD and RecordNow for everything else.
I have made over twenty DL burns with Imgburn and zero coasters,everyone of them play perfectly in all of my DVD players.

[hech54]

Nero Sucks for burning, Roxio Sucks for burning and the 32k gap is a bunch of nonsense...case closed.

[lordsmurf]

Nero also has chronic issues with the UDF/ISO bridge, as well as issues with ISO and UDF in general.

Prassi-based burning software has no such problems (RecordNow, for example), nor do many custom burning systems (like ImgBurn).

However, I will say that the Nero API use (DVD Shrink, for example) tends to be better than the Nero templates when using full Nero. Go figure. I can get DVD Shrink to burn a disc just fine using the Nero API, but using the DVD-Video template inside Nero results in problems. The API will name as desired, but direct type-in from a template will not. Of course, the IFO/BUP issue lingers. I refer only to SL media here. DL is not possible with Nero.

The program is too buggy.

ImgBurn is lean and has a coder that seems to better understand the format.

[lordsmurf]

Why do I know more than a programmer that gets paid to make this crap work, anyway? What has the world come to when the skilled workers are less knowledgeable than the customers who use the products?

[Marvingj]

This is the best image burning software I have found. The thing I like about it most is you can set the priority of the program when it burns. I can have the CPU pegged at 100% and still get high quality burns. Wish it worked with audio CD's, but it handles my data backups and video projects with ease.

[RealTelstar]

Nero is bloated,

I'm used to nero, expecially to burn data discs and images.
But everytime i have to install it i have to manually deselect all the crap that's added, except info tools and the good wav editor. Boring. And it still takes a lot of diskspace.

[fritzi93]

I haven't had Nero(v6) installed on my PC in over a year and I don't miss it.I only use Imgburn for DVD and RecordNow for everything else.

Same here.

[Seeker47]

However, I will say that the Nero API use (DVD Shrink, for example) tends to be better than the Nero templates when using full Nero. Go figure. I can get DVD Shrink to burn a disc just fine using the Nero API, but using the DVD-Video template inside Nero results in problems.

That's pretty much been my experience with Shrink-using-Nero; straight up with Nero was much more iffy.

The API will name as desired, but direct type-in from a template will not. Of course, the IFO/BUP issue lingers. I refer only to SL media here. DL is not possible with Nero.

I actually did a few successful DLs with Shrink-using-Nero, but the success rate was something like 1 in 10, so once I found out about Imgburn 2, I wised up and switched the DL stuff over to that. This would have been a problem for me without the Guides, however: not a stroll in the park like running Shrink. I gather there is a last 3.2.15 version of Shrink that was modded to call Imgburn instead of Nero for burning (?), but I haven't tried it. Or am I thinking of something else ?

The program is too buggy.

The degree of bugginess seems to vary a fair bit with the version or sub-version. I'm still at 6.6.something, and never found a convincing reason to upgrade past that. It has been reasonably reliable for me, but then I rarely do anything fancy with it, or make use of the other modules.

[Seeker47]

Why do I know more than a programmer that gets paid to make this crap work, anyway? What has the world come to when the skilled workers are less knowledgeable than the customers who use the products?

It's not too different from the disconcerting feeling one gets (for a long time now) walking into most places that sell consumer electronics, and you immediately discover that you know a whole lot more about the product of interest than anyone in the store ! Most likely, you know a lot more about the whole product category, and whatever technologies may be involved. This gets pretty dismal, fast, but the type of sales person I bought my last CRT tv from, eleven years ago, who seemed to know quite a bit about the subject, probably can't find a gig like that today that pays a semi-living wage. The store he worked at no longer exists.

I hope this is not also the case for the supposedly higher-end stores like Ken Crane's . . . but not having been to them I wouldn't know.

[usually_quiet]

Thanks for the explanations folks. I am glad to know the technical reasons why I should use ImgBurn for DVD video on SL DVD. (I haven't used DL yet.) These are not things I would likely ever have found out on my own. I guess I will have to hope I never need the .BUP files on any of the many DVD's I have burned with Nero.

The version of Nero I have is Nero Express 6, which indeed came bundled with my DVD burner. At least I didn't pay extra for it.

[lordsmurf]

There is a modded DVD Shrink that uses ImgBurn, yes. I switched to this when my Pioneer 111 was not visible to my copy of Nero 6. I dumper Nero altogether when ImgBurn added build mode.

I still use Nero for audio CD once in a blue moon.

[innerchaos]

LONG LONG time User of your site first time Poster but after this comment I stumbled across I couldnt resist..

Dear Lordsmurf - please apply your comment to every aspect and every facet of life....


I feel this way every time I go to any store or call any help desk for any purpose whatsoever

you cant even go to bestbuy and get a decent answer from the geeks that work in the computer area... you ask a simple question and if its not printed in the 3x4 card sitting in front of whatever item you ask about then they dont know..

Why do I know more than a programmer that gets paid to make this crap work, anyway? What has the world come to when the skilled workers are less knowledgeable than the customers who use the products?

[cowboyup910]

Ever since ImgBurn was released, members here have been praising it, and saying it is better for burning DVD video than Nero, but I have yet to hear an explanation as to why this is so.

I have been using Nero for a couple of years, and have had good results, as long as I used quality media. I have used ImgBurn too, and it's fine, but I haven't found anything I like more about it, other than the additional choices available for burn speed. Just curious as to what the other reasons its fans have for preferring ImgBurn.

Then continue using Nero. Why would one want to pay for burning when its free? Nero is full of crapware and lost the simple things like just burning.

[davexnet]

Some good points in this thread... I'll add one of my own which I became enlightened upon after posting in the Imgburn forums.

I noticed writing data files to DVD+RW that sometimes Imgburn wanted to first long format the whole disk (about 20 minutes)
and other times, it just wrote the files. I asked about this in their forums, and it was pointed out to me that if those disks had
previously been written to by Nero 6 (which I used to use), Nero would damage the disks formatting and Imgburn detected and
corrected it.

I first noticed the effect of this with a disk of avi/divx files written as data by Nero. My standalone had a horrible time trying to read it. But once I'd re-written the disk with IB, it was fine.

[Noahtuck]

Ever since ImgBurn was released, members here have been praising it, and saying it is better for burning DVD video than Nero, but I have yet to hear an explanation as to why this is so.

I have been using Nero for a couple of years, and have had good results, as long as I used quality media. I have used ImgBurn too, and it's fine, but I haven't found anything I like more about it, other than the additional choices available for burn speed. Just curious as to what the other reasons its fans have for preferring ImgBurn.

Then continue using Nero. Why would one want to pay for burning when its free? Nero is full of crapware and lost the simple things like just burning.

WOW!!!
Really ?

You're going to reply to a 3 year old thread by just reading the FIRST post

Maybe you should have read all of them, like the OP's LAST post (which is still 3 years old)

Thanks for the explanations folks. I am glad to know the technical reasons why I should use ImgBurn for DVD video on SL DVD. (I haven't used DL yet.) These are not things I would likely ever have found out on my own. I guess I will have to hope I never need the .BUP files on any of the many DVD's I have burned with Nero.

The version of Nero I have is Nero Express 6, which indeed came bundled with my DVD burner. At least I didn't pay extra for it.

[innerchaos]

I suppose I should take the blame for bumping this thread...

although in my defense I actually was trying to just honor lordsmurf for his quip about the programmers...

[turk690]

In the meantime Nero is v10 now and more bloatlala than ever.

[cowboyup910]

I suppose I should take the blame for bumping this thread...

It doesn't matter its a free forum. Everyone is entitled to their beliefs, just because there are some cyber bully out there trolling the forums, just to make themselves feel better. What a waste of life@!