Talk:Nero Digital

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] "Omissions"

"Re-re-added omissions. ;-) The version reverted to was missing a couple of important things." What is that supposed to mean? How can it miss a couple of stuff, when you're removing the content? Look, I'm getting tired of this. If you want to add vital content to the article, do it. But don't remove facts from it. Stop reverting. EliasAlucard|Talk 16:52, 21 Jun, 2005 (UTC)

Hello! :)

I understand you have a sense of propriety over this article and feel protective towards this software product. But we have to remember that Wikipedia articles are supposed to be first and foremost informative.

So, I invite you to read the new version. It looks shorter, but actually adds a couple of important points:

• That the product is primarily a DVD ripper.
• That it does not ship as DirectShow/VfW codecs, hence prohibiting it from being used in general video work.
• That Nero Showtime is needed to view subtitles ripped from DVD.

I agree that it's a good codec, but these are important things that should be pointed out about the product: especially for people who are seeking DivX alternatives, or who are ripping subtitled DVDs. It's somewhat frustrating when you revert these additions.

And finally, if it was my writing style that annoyed you (I guess I can be very obtuse at times), why not add them yourself?

—Ghakko 20:43, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

This is not true, VLC can play the subtitles. You're stripping it down, you've removed a lot of stuff. Most of the stuff you've added are true, but that was also the case with the stuff you've removed.

EliasAlucard|Talk 17:28, 22 Jun, 2005 (UTC)

Hello again. :)

Which important points were removed? I'd be happy to add them back in if I indeed threw out something important. Let's seek the union of our two versions of the article.

—Ghakko 01:59, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)