CDBurnerXP

Platforms available: Win2k SP4 & up, XP, Vista, Windows 7 (as long as .NET is present)

Portability: Portable version available <http://cdburnerxp.se/downloads/portable/>, but machine running it has to have .NET Framework installed

Version as of this writing: 4.2.4

Standout or unique feature: Can convert .bin or .nrg image files into .iso.

CDBurnerXP is a really well-made program. It’s probably not too much of a stretch to say it’s something along the lines of Nero Burning ROM 5, circa 2000-ish (but with fleshed out DVD burning capabilities and a prettier interface). Like old school Nero, it’s loaded with cool features and handy functions, but not overloaded. You get the basics like disc-to-disc copying, audio and data disc burning, and ISO image making and burning.

What’s more notable than what’s in CDBurnerXP is what’s not in CDBurnerXP. Unlike modern, “full-featured” burning suites, there’s no omnipresent control panel that just sits in your system tray taking up resources, no bundled media player software, no audio or video editing tools, or any other bloatware. The only thing that a few hard core optical drive loving geeks may miss are some of the drive and media performance measurement utilities. Nero’s DiscSpeed and DriveSpeed utilities can be pretty cool, but if you need that kind of utility, you either already have Nero or you know the standalone free utilities that can take the place of those apps.

The lack of all those add-on functions makes an enormous difference in terms of overall program size. The current full version of Nero can weigh in at up to a hard drive crushing 1.5GB! CDBurnerXP is downright svelte compared to that, coming in at under 10MB (installed).

So what’s not to like? The only thing that’s a slight negative to me is the .NET Framework requirement. Perhaps someone can convince me otherwise in the comments section, but I’m not a big fan of code frameworks like .NET, Java, and the like. The reason is that when developers use frameworks, it shifts developers’ burden of making clean, tight code to users’ machines in the form of increased resource usage. When you have to call up 100% of a framework for a program that only uses 50% of it, that seems like inefficient use of PC resources. Even though modern machines are powerful enough to run CDBurnerXP (and most framework-based programs) at perfectly acceptable speeds and without adverse effects on multitasking, I have noticed that it can be a little sluggish and prone to high CPU utilization.

Even with that tempering statement, though, CDBurnerXP is an excellent choice, and I honestly think it’s more useful on my machines than any of the commercial alternatives out there.

———–

InfraRecorder

Platforms available: Win2k, XP, Vista, Windows 7

Portability: PortableApps version and non-installing .zip version available directly from the InfraRecorder site.

Version as of this writing: 0.46

Standout or unique feature: Near-perfect balance of features, size, portability, and good looks.

InfraRecorder and CDBurnerXP are nearly identical from the features standpoint. The only sizable difference being that InfraRecorder lacks the image file converter function. Just like CDBurnerXP, when you fire it up, you get a quick launcher that’ll let you pick the type of project you want to work on, and from there you’re up and running.

What’s slickest about InfraRecorder has to be its no-nonsense interface. Something about it (maybe the icons?) is really Linux-esque. Its toolbar is less cluttered than CDBurnerXP’s, which helps you get in and just get what you need without a lot of visual noise. Even running off of a USB flash drive, it’s pleasingly snappy and reactive.  The fact that the whole program weighs in at around 7MB also has to aid in the responsive and light feeling you get when using it.

In the past, I’ve used CDBurnerXP as my main burning app of choice and kept InfraRecorder as my portable solution. That’s because once you get used to CDBurnerXP’s more cluttered interface, I actually find it nice to have one-click access to some things like media properties on the rare occassions I need them. But as InfraRecorder gets better and better version to version, I find myself even running it off of my flash drive at home when I have a really quick project and don’t feel like loading up the slightly slower CDBurnerXP.

While it’s not much concern to the majority of end users, it is interesting to note that InfraRecorder is a true open source app, licensed under the GPL. (CDBurnerXP, on the other hand, is freeware. If you’re curious about the difference, you can learn more here.)

If your burning needs go no farther than making data and/or audio discs, copying, and working with ISO images, my advice is to grab InfraRecorder and don’t look back. It’ll do everything you need without getting in your way or overwhelming you with extraneous options. Not to mention, it’ll do all that portably, too, if you need it to.

————

Nero Freeware <http://www.nero.com/eng/downloads-nero9-free.php>

Platforms available: Win2k, XP, Vista, Windows 7

Portability: None

Version as of this writing: Nero 9 – Freeware Version

Standout or unique feature: Does everything possible to make you not want to use it

Maybe I’m dating myself a bit here (I’m not really THAT old!), but I grew up with Nero. I always loved it. It came bundled with almost every CD or DVD burner I’ve ever bought. I loved Nero so much, in fact, that if the top-rated drive at the time came bundled with Adaptec/Roxio EZ CD Creator, but the number two came with Nero, I’d buy the lower rated drive. It was really that much better. Unfortunately, as you surely noticed from my thoughts on the other two programs above, I don’t use Nero anymore. The reason for that is because it has become completely overrun with bloat. (Does a media burning app really need to blow up to 1.5GB with “features” of negligible utility in order to stay relevant and continue to sell copies?)

With that as a backdrop, you can understand why it pains me so much to take call this spade… well… a pile of crap. I’m not even going to bother comparing it feature by feature to CDBurnerXP or InfraRecorder because it’s easier to just give its entire feature set and let that speak for itself. What you get with Nero Freeware Version is the ability to copy discs and write CD and DVD data discs.

…

…

Oh, were you waiting for more? Sorry, there is no more. In fact, here’s a direct quote from Nero Freeware Version’s download page:

“This version of Nero 9 contains simply data burning and disc copying features for CDs and DVDs. Additional features and functionality are available with an upgrade to Nero 9 full version.”

To add insult to injury, there have been reports of the installation defaulting to trying to install the Ask.com Toolbar. And! And! Wait for it… It tries to change your default homepage! Ugghh. When are companies going to learn that the goodwill they gain from putting out freeware offerings goes negative when they put in this kind of adware and/or nagware? What a colossal slip-up. For what it’s worth, I installed it twice, once under a ‘typical’ install and once under a ‘custom’ install, and neither time did I encounter either of those two issues. Maybe the user backlash was enough to make the developer give up that shady little revenue stream within just a day or two of its initial release.

By the way, above I wrote a bit about Nero’s bloat, right? Well how’s this for a little example of that? Below is a screen grab from Revo Uninstaller of all the crap that gets thrown on your machine when installing this inocuous-looking little app. And that’s just the stuff easily identified as Nero. I noticed the installer plugging in a bunch of Windows components as well, but I can’t even venture a guess as to where all that stuff is residing.

As you’ve pretty much figured out by now, my recommendation on Nero 9 Freeware Version is to just skip it. I’m 100% confident that you’ll be infinitely better served by either CDBurnerXP and/or InfraRecorder.

Does the difference between freeware & open source matter?

Let’s use this inaugural entry as a chance to highlight exactly why some free programs are called freeware and others open source.

You hear ‘freeware’ and ‘open source’ used interchangeably almost all the time. Does it matter whether you’re using a freeware program or an open source program? I mean, either way it’s free, right?

Reading even a few entries in this blog, you’ll quickly see that I’m not a big fan of elitism or fanboyism, so to put it straight, for most end users, it really doesn’t matter.

But scratching a bit deeper and looking from the software development community’s point of view, there’s an important philosophical difference between the two that should be respected. As the name suggests, open source means that the underlying source code that teaches the magical hamsters in the computer to do new tricks is right there, open for the world to see. But the vast majority of users don’t care at all about the source code, they just want a handy program that works. It’s my belief that this alone is the key reason most users don’t know the difference between freeware and open source. Even if the source code download link is right next to the installer file’s link, most users don’t even see it because source code is so far from their realm of interest.

Freeware, on the other hand, is usually made by individuals, small groups of collaborators, or companies. They choose to keep the source private (a.k.a. closed source) for various reasons. One of the big ones is so that they can take advantage of a newfangled business model called “freemium”, where a basic version of the program or service is offered for free, but more advanced options and features are limited to customers who shell out for a ‘pro’ version.

That fundamental philosophical difference leads to a handful of contrasts between how open source and freeware projects run. Keep in mind that the list below is based on generalizations, not hard and fast rules. As with most things, there’s a spectrum of development styles, so not all projects will perfectly fit each mold, but they’re definitely solid rules of thumb.

Open source

• Anyone with needed skills can join the project
• Feature additions can be freewheeling; if you can merge your feature idea into the app in a given release cycle and there are no bugs, odds are good it’ll be in the program
• Forks can be created by taking the original source code and substantially tweaking it or adding major new features, interfaces, etc.
• Developers tend to use the word free with regard to the freedom afforded by the licensing scheme more than price (though the price is almost always zero)

Freeware

• Closed development group (as mentioned above)
• Feature set is tightly controlled and additions are rolled out as release cycle milestones are hit
• Since the code is kept private, alternatives and/or competitors have to build their versions from scratch
• Developers use the word free in reference to the software’s price since the license doesn’t give the rights to reuse or repackage the source code