Martin Bochnig wrote:>
I (as a daily [and multiplatform] year-long cdrecord(-ProDVD) user) absolutely
agree to what Joerg has said!
If "cdrw is better than cdrecord[, because it has less and easier to understand
options]", then this would be logically equal to saying "life is easier after one is
finally dead[, because you have probably less problems then]".
Sorry to say that, but it is true.
Prove the opposite.
Nobody may be able to.
If you want to use a life analogy try this one:
"Life is simpler as a child because you have less options, less worries
and less freedom. When you are an adult you are responsible for your
own choices and have to make decisions based on multiple options, life
is hard".
See it goes both ways depending on your view point.
Put me in the child camp when it comes to my needs for burning CD/DVD
media.
Plus: cdrecord is more than just the 'cdrecord' binary itself. Don't forget the
other tools (including 'readcd') and libs (libscg) shipping with it.
'readcd' is very important!
It isn't important to *me*. When designing a UI you have to consider
that you will have difference classes of users.
Note that I even suggested that cdrw(1) be reimplemented using the
cdrecord library/binaries.
This isn't about how good the individual programs are at putting the
bits onto or getting them off of CD/DVD media. For me this *is* ONLY a
UI issue.
I fully appreciate all the hard work that Joerg has put into his suite
of programs but unfortunately for me I find cdrecord harder to use.
Summary:
If one needs to perform more complicated tasks, than just burning a pre-made
iso, or burning the holiday photo album, then the schily tools are _essential_.
Period.
I get that and I have never disputed it; but you seemed to have
completely missed is for those of us that DON'T need to do those
complicated tasks cdrecord(1) is a very confusing CLI with a very
confusing and highly technical man page.
--
Darren J Moffat
_______________________________________________
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
