EDIT : this topic is split from http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....howtopic=16131& (http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=16131&) /EDIT
To replace EAC ?? Why is this such a matter of principle not to use closed source software? Especially if it is freely available.
Edit: If you're looking for an open source ripper for improving it that would have been fine. You might even speak to Andre and you'll have access to code if you have such purposes. But as far as I could understand this is not the case. Then why do you need the source for? Why do you want to replace EAC with something strictly open source? This makes no sense. You're entitled to your way of thinking and purposes but HA is not a place of zealotry.
But just for the sake of replacing it with something open source? This makes no sense. You're entitled to your way of thinking and purposes but HA is not a place of zealotry.
I don't think he was being zealous at all. It's just a personal opinion and he is trying to get help without making any claims. On the contrary, "This makes no sense" is an unsuitable sentence IMHO
I too prefer using Free Software whenever I can. Does this make me a zealot ?? I don't think so. It's a philosophy that you may not understand, but others are free to think that way without being zealots...
I too prefer using Free Software whenever I can. Does this make me a zealot ??
Surely this won't make you a zealot ... but
1. EAC is practically free (but you are free to donate something like I did)
2. Not using closed-source software although it is proven to be the best available must have a reason ...
So perhaps Cey can tell us what his reasons are ...
@mlejeune : But EAC is already free!? I could understand such a philosophy if he provided any such arguments. For instance my philosophy is all intellectual property should be freely communicated (this does not mean open source). I'm very curious to hear the argument behind Cey's philosophy because it sounded as one of those open source zealots to me.
Yes I could as well be wrong, no offense.
I can see only one post here actually trying to help the user and answer what he asked.
Why abandon eac if it works for you? Open source isn't always better.
Ps. Cdparanoia isn't the default ripping method in cdex. You need to change the preferences if you want to use cdparanoia for ripping.
No, open source isn't always better. There are many cases where closed source is better.
But, the way I see it, if open source is at least as good, then why not use it?
Sure, EAC is good. But it's also under the control of one entity. If they change their mind, then EAC disappears.
Also, EAC is one of those programs that is in perpetual beta. Actually, for EAC, it seems to be more like in perpetual 'pre-beta'. Sure, it works, but.... There just comes a time a program should go to a full release number.
And as I told rjamorim, I didn't even know cdex used cdparanoia but had assumed it used some home brewed method. Thanks for telling me that it's not enabled by default, too.
To replace EAC ?? Why is this such a matter of principle not to use closed source software? Especially if it is freely available.
Edit: If you're looking for an open source ripper for improving it that would have been fine. You might even speak to Andre and you'll have access to code if you have such purposes. But as far as I could understand this is not the case. Then why do you need the source for? Why do you want to replace EAC with something strictly open source? This makes no sense. You're entitled to your way of thinking and purposes but HA is not a place of zealotry.
Free for how long? No, I'm not saying they plan on doing that, but it does happen on more than a few occasions.
I've even beta tested a number of programs that were supposed to be free but as soon as the beta testing was done, it was released commercially instead.
If an open source program is just as good, then why not use it? Open source isn't inherently better, but it does have some advantages.
And no, I'm not planning on helping any coding work on some open source project. My coding skills pretty much ended in the days of DOS. I've never done any Windows coding at all.
And I don't need the source. Just knowing that it is available is good enough. Knowing that it exists in case the author gets killed in a car wreck or something is good to know.
Free for how long? (...)
Well, IIRC, EAC has been in beta/pre-beta stage for more than 4 years now, and I doesn't seem likely that it will go near final release anytime soon.
Also, EAC is already very famous and respected. I think that this would be the best time to start charging, don't you think?
This "they might charge someday" argument that Open Source "fans" always bring up doesn't seem to apply here.
The truth is that there are better free-closed-source programs than Open Source.
Well, IIRC, EAC has been in beta/pre-beta stage for more than 4 years now, and I doesn't seem likely that it will go near final release anytime soon.
Believe me, I am following EAC's development for nearly all the time now and it is very close to some "release" status ... it cannot get much better than it gets with the next release
Well, IIRC, EAC has been in beta/pre-beta stage for more than 4 years now, and I doesn't seem likely that it will go near final release anytime soon.
Believe me, I am following EAC's development for nearly all the time now and it is very close to some "release" status ... it cannot get much better than it gets with the next release
Yeah, I am also aware of the upcoming release.
But I was not talking about a "technical milestone", I was talking about a "regular" milestone. Cey said that sometimes when beta software reach a milestone release, usually 1.0, they start charging.
EAC is pre-beta as we all know, and it works better than a lot more software supposedly in much better stages of development. But normal people would not pay for a thing labeled "beta" or even "pre-beta". There is even people who would not use such a thing.
I meant to tell Cey that I don't see EAC reaching the 1.0 milestone anytime soon, regardless of any major developments.
BTW, since you are so aware of EAC's development, could you shed some light on the missing "Detect TOC Manually"? Is it gone forever? Or will it be back in an improved form in the next release?
I went to the EAC forum, but saw nothing about it.
Free for how long? (...)
Well, IIRC, EAC has been in beta/pre-beta stage for more than 4 years now, and I doesn't seem likely that it will go near final release anytime soon.
Also, EAC is already very famous and respected. I think that this would be the best time to start charging, don't you think?
This "they might charge someday" argument that Open Source "fans" always bring up doesn't seem to apply here.
The truth is that there are better free-closed-source programs than Open Source.
EAC is famous and respected etc. I haven't said or implied otherwise.
And they probably wont take it fully commercial. Possibly shareware with a few limited features for non-paying customers, etc. As I mentioned, I've had that happen with me before. Both in stuff I've beta tested and in stuff that I had used for a while. (ISOBuster springs to mind, but that's certainly not the only case.)
People and situations change.
But I'm not really worried about that. I was *not* the one who brought up the subject of EAC being free etc. I was just responding to what 'atici' said.
I think I've been reasonably clear, but maybe not.
1) If an open source project works just as well, then why not use it? Just because something isn't famous doesn't mean it doesn't work.
2) I have said several times that being open source is not inherently any better or any worse than closed source. Just because something is closed source doesn't mean it's bad and just because it's open source doesn't mean it's good.
But, if an open source project works just as well, then *why* not use it?
At least that way you get some assurance about development still being possible if the main developer wants to make money from it, or gets killed in a car crash, or just looses interest, etc. There aren't any guarantees, of course, but at least with the source available there is a chance for development to continue, where as with closed source there is little chance.
In spite of what many in here are wanting, this sin't about open source vs. closed source. So get over it.
I just feel that if an open source program works just as well as a closed one, and is actively developed, then why not use the open source program?
Look at cdex for example. It's far more actively developed than EAC and is more responsive to bug fixes, user suggestions etc. Is that inherent in OpenSource.... No. But it is a case where an open source program happens to be a good and worth using. So why not use it? (Well, in this case because I didn't know CDEx had decent ripping abilities. I thought it was just basic abilities like oh-so many other rippers. I've never tested it with damaged cds.)
So far, the only two responses that have been at all helpful have been "rjamorin" for pointing out cdex did more than blindly ripping, and "Latexxx" for pointing out that the cdparanoia stuff wasn't enabled by default in cdex.
If you don't have something helpful to say, then, well, it isn't helpful.
I don't think there is anything as good as EAC. Suggestion:
Use EAC until they cancel or start charging for it then look for a free alternative.
I remember people saying what you're saying 2-3 years ago, and EACs still free and available. If we'd listened to them at the time, there'd just be that many more crappy rips floating around. For all anyone knows EAC could be open sourced in the future or it could go commercial.
But I was not talking about a "technical milestone", I was talking about a "regular" milestone. Cey said that sometimes when beta software reach a milestone release, usually 1.0, they start charging.
I didn't say or imply that when a program reaches the 1.0 milestone they start charging for it. Thast does indeed happen on some occasions, but it also happens at other version numbers too.
I do tend to get tired of using perpetual alpha & beta software, though.
I don't think there is anything as good as EAC. Suggestion:
Use EAC until they cancel or start charging for it then look for a free alternative.
I remember people saying what you're saying 2-3 years ago, and EACs still free and available. If we'd listened to them at the time, there'd just be that many more crappy rips floating around. For all anyone knows EAC could be open sourced in the future or it could go commercial.
Again, I wasn't the one who brought that I should keep using EAC because it's free.
I didn't mention that at all until somebody brought up that subject of EAC being free and why in the world would I want to leave a free program, etc. etc.
(As I've pointed out, there are several reasons why development could stop. Including the author getting killed or just losing interest, etc.)
Still, I do understand what you are saying about waiting to find another program until I need to.
There is some sense in that.
But I'd rather at least look around and see what exists. I may chose to keep using EAC, but I'd still like to know what my alternatives are.
I can see only one post here actually trying to help the user and answer what he asked.
Amazing isn't it. All he did was ask if there was an open source cd ripper that was of similar quality as EAC. And what happens? He get's bombarded with questions about why he doesn't want to use EAC.
Who the hell cares what he uses? It's his business what he uses to rip CD's. He just asked if there was anything out there. Geeez....
Why does everybody think they need to tell everyone else what to use? If you have an answer, then offer it, if you don't, then go on to the next thread.
Edit: spelling
Amazing isn't it. All he did was ask if there was an open source cd ripper that was of similar quality as EAC. And what happens? He get's bombarded with questions about why he doesn't want to use EAC.
Why are you so surprised?
It is only natural, IMHO, that is a person should ask something like that (going against forum "dogma") it is what he will get.
I don't buy the "it's his business" argument. Of course, he will end up using whatever he wants but when he asks for public opinion he should be prepared for different opinions.
If anybody here knows an open source ripper that has most of the featues of EAC (e.g. CUE sheet handling), and rips as reliably as EAC (drives that cache audio are particularly problematic) then I'd love to know it. But I haven't seen such a program yet.
Exactly.
@Cey:
I don't really see a point in worrying whether Andre Whiethoff will or will not break our hearts some day (he will) or will he be struck by a lightning bolt and leave us doomed to the world of lousy rips.
EAC's development will stop someday, that is for sure.
But, does it really keep you from "enjoying" it?
You say that you want to know about alternatives, but what for?
What alternatives do you need right know?
It sounds like yet another way to rationalize "excessive love" for Open Source.
And I know that it is not you who started this debate not is it the focus on this discussion, but I had to tell you that I think you are missing the point here.
If you are so worried about the viability of the future, why are you even ripping and encoding? ALL of the formats you mention are subject to the same fate. Even Vorbis, being Open Source has absolutely nothing to do with its development pace.
If anybody here knows an open source ripper that has most of the featues of EAC (e.g. CUE sheet handling), and rips as reliably as EAC (drives that cache audio are particularly problematic) then I'd love to know it. But I haven't seen such a program yet.
Exactly.
Well, I didn't know whether there were any good alternatives, which is why I asked. See how simple that is... And oddly enough, it does appear that cdex has better ripping than I though. See how amazing that is...? I learned something new by asking a question!
@Cey:
I don't really see a point in worrying whether Andre Whiethoff will or will not break our hearts some day (he will) or will he be struck by a lightning bolt and leave us doomed to the world of lousy rips.
Actually I didn't say that.
But that is kind of the point. If that happens, then development will stop and EAC will cease to work well for future cd's and drives. It wont work well in the future, just for the past stuff. As new drive designs come along, changes have to be made in EAC to keep up. Same with some cd's.
You say that you want to know about alternatives, but what for?
What alternatives do you need right know?
Does my driving a car keep me from knowing about alternatives, such as pickup trucks or SUV's? Knowing about alternatives is a pre-requisite for even the possibility of *DIS*liking those alternatives.
Before you can make a choice, you have to have alternatives. Right now, there appears to only be EAC. At least rjamorin told me that cdex can do some reasonable ripping, which gives me an alternative.
It sounds like yet another way to rationalize "excessive love" for Open Source
Well, considering you don't really know me, you aren't really in a position to make a statement like that.
Although I do like some of the ideas of open source, the reality is that most of the stuff I use is not open source.
BUT when a good, suitable open source alternative exists that I happen to like, then I don't see any point in continuing to use closed source, either.
If you are so worried about the viability of the future, why are you even ripping and encoding?
*I'm* not the one worried about it.
I just asked a nice simple question: Was there an open source alternative to EAC.
And as I've said before (in talking about cdex), no, being open source doesn't automatically mean that the development is better. In cdex's case it is, but to use your OggVorbis example below, no development is nearly non-existant. That isn't related to open vs. closed source.
ALL of the formats you mention are subject to the same fate. Even Vorbis, being Open Source has absolutely nothing to do with its development pace
What???
I don't remember mentioning *any* audio formats.
But yes, you are right... just because Ogg Vorbis is open souce has nothing to do with its development pace. Or, rather, it's lack of pace. To be honest, I generally use LAME rather than Vorbis. And that has to do with its availablity and quality, not because its open source.
Perhaps this thread should be split into two parts? One for discussion about open source rippers and a second one for a religious debate on open source vs. closed source. I wont be visiting the second thread....
when he asks for public opinion he should be prepared for different opinions.
His original post didn't ask for an opinion. He asked if there were any open source CD rippers.
His original post didn't ask for an opinion. He asked if there were any open source CD rippers.
I agree completely. And that's why I disagree about all this bitching about his choice in rippers.
Quoting him:
I'm looking for open source cd rippers for Windows.
He never asked "which ripper you think is best" or something like that.
He get's bombarded with questions about why he doesn't want to use EAC.
And that's why I disagree about all this bitching about his choice in rippers
Sorry but that's BS. Who' bitching him to use EAC? I never mention myself using EAC anywhere.
I just don't understand the reasoning behind the desire to
replace, as Cey puts it, (that means
he is using it) EAC just because it's not open source. This just reminds me of a common form of zealotry these days.
Surely Cey can do whatever he wants, noone is forcing him to use a particular piece of software here but questioning his argument is sth. I feel I am entitled to do. A thunderbolt striking Andre is rather dubious, and I guess that's the best argument I could get
I just don't understand the reasoning behind the desire to replace, as Cey puts it, (that means he is using it) EAC
Why do you need to understand it? Was that a requirement? He aksed if there were any open source rippers. No for anybody to agree with his choices.
If there is any zealotry here, it is EAC zealotry. That's obvious.
Why do you need to understand it? Was that a requirement? No for anybody to agree with his choices.
That's what you think. I believe it behooves us all to correct/remind by counter-argumentation if any single person in the world takes sth. for granted without sufficient evidence or good argument on his part. Check out: William Clifford's Ethics of Belief (http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/w_k_clifford/ethics_of_belief.html)
If there is any zealotry here, it is EAC zealotry. That's obvious.
Pure BS. Go back and read what I said.
questioning his argument is sth. I feel I am entitled to do.
What gives you that right?
Besides, he didn't use any argument at his first post.
At all. He made a very simple question, and a bunch of people fell over him for deviating from the pattern.
I believe it behooves us all to correct/remind by counter-argumentation if any single person in the world takes sth. for granted without sufficient evidence or good argument on his part.
He never asked anyone "do you agree with me?", "do you believe this is the right thing to do?" or "am I missing something?".
People here need to stop forcing on others what they believe is the right thing to do "Use foobar! Use EAC! WMA sucks!" if these others aren't asking for opinions.
People here are too opinionated. I am too, but I don't try forcing people to do what I do, use what I use.
He made a very simple question, and a bunch of people fell over him for deviating from the pattern.
There are a lot of great things to be said of this forum, and this is one example of what is wrong with it.
He never asked anyone "do you agree with me?", "do you believe this is the right thing to do?" or "am I missing something?".
I don't care. It's my duty and everyone else's duty as far as I am concerned if someone takes sth. for granted/makes a decision based on insufficient evidence/argument.
People here need to stop forcing on others what they believe is the right thing to do "Use foobar! Use EAC! WMA sucks!" if these others aren't asking for opinions.
Once again. I never force him into a particular piece of software. All I was doing is to criticise his decision on giving up some piece of software just because it is not open source. And I don't think anyone on the planet could explain me reasonably why this is something logical which proves my point. That's all I am going to say.
Edit: argument->decision.
All I was doing is to criticise his argument
he didn't use any argument, for Christ's sake!!!!
Only after everyone started confrontating him for being different.
The problem is: AFAIK there is no open source program that works as well as EAC. Not a single one.
This cannot, and will never be, an argument against trying another solution and especially not against writing it. Good software doesn't spontaneously come into existence but starts out buggy and incomplete and then improves over time.
The main argument for open source, other than the fact that you're pretty much guaranteed to always have at least what you have now, is that it benefits more people. Usually, someone writes an application, and someone else might find another use for it, or port it to other operating system. This would probably have happened much more rapidly to CDParanoia III if it weren't so tightly wed to Linux.
Whatever happened to splitting off topics? i can only see Roberto's first reply and a few more on topic, the rest are dissertations of an individual who can't accept other people's choices, and counter arguments to it...
IMO atici deserves a warning.
IMO atici deserves a warning.
Oh yeah? what about the choices of the individual in this thread (http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=15963&hl=) ? I think they're far more respectable but no one seems to care.
Oh yeah? what about the choices of the individual in this thread (http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=15963&hl=) ? I think they're far more respectable but no one seems to care.
I don't know if you're talking about Soren, but I'll take the bait.
In that thread, he said
why he was concerned about APE's robustness. And he asked if APE is OK - one can deduce that question also contains "if it's not OK, then what is?".
So, in that thread, it's OK to give opinions.
But in Cey's first post, he
didn't tell why he wanted an open sourced ripper -he just wanted to replace EAC - , and neither asked if EAC, or anything else, is OK. Still, you came shoving your opinion on him and criticizing his reasoning (that you didn't even know for sure at that time!).
Also, I'll reply to something you later edited:
I don't care. It's my duty and everyone else's duty as far as I am concerned if someone takes sth. for granted/makes a decision based on insufficient evidence/argument.
You didn't knew he was taking anything for granted. You just guessed it.
You didn't knew what evidence he had. Therefore, neither you knew if it was insufficient or not.
And he didn't use any argument.
And no, it's not anyone's duty to meddle with other's affairs if these others didn't ask for it.
So, in that thread, it's OK to give opinions.
I thought so too. But then the thread is closed by the moderator. That makes me think it's not OK to give opinions. If it wasn't OK to give opinions in that thread, it's definitely not OK to give in this one.
You didn't knew he was taking anything for granted. You just guessed it. And he didn't use any argument.
There was no need to guess. There could be no valid argument justifying his decision, and that was my point of criticism. I would've apologized if he could give a good reason for what he is doing. I wish he said he was a developer, which could only explain the reason for otherwise such a ridiculous post.
I really have no problems with CDEx, cdparanoia or with the people using them. I think they're very good rippers and very respectable projects. I too like the open source movement. But although I tried to refrain from commenting again in this thread, I was repeatedly blamed for bitching that he is not using EAC but an inferior ripper.
No bitter feelings. I think going on with this discussion really makes the thread stray away from its already petty point. So let's talk about open source rippers and help him out.
I thought so too. But then the thread is closed by the moderator. That makes me think it's not OK to give opinions. If it wasn't OK to give opinions in that thread, it's definitely not OK to give in this one.
Hrm.. as I understand, that thread was closed because Soren was planning something illegal (rip the CDs and then sell them, keeping the rips). Not because he raised concerns about APE.
Read Tigre's post just above Peter's.