OK, I hear the personal objections which are very reasonable, but why are they doing it? It would not have been a trivial task to rewrite the software. If it is a piece of market research to probe the transition dynamics from MS to Linux it could be useful. As a billing mechanism it lacks a certain logic.
In my Windows days I had several copies of Nero, all OEM, that came free with burners. I had no incentive to buy a retail copy. It is quite a good user interface and relatively bug free. Now that I have migrated to Linux I would actually consider using Nero again, if it was in an OEM bundle. But like others I am unlikely to buy a redundant Windows version to get an unproven Linux version. So we are lost to any statistics they may be gathering.
Or perhaps they are monitoring this sort of forum to test market response?
If more of the Great Unwashed are tempted to move to Linux, the second tier branded software vendors must have some concern about loss of market and/or failure to stick with their users' changing requirements. I would think that most will not have a valid business model in an open license environment and will be scratching their heads.
Perhaps Nero intend at some time to ship the Windows and Linux versions on the same CD, including for their OEM versions. Supporting more operating systems could make their product more attractive to the drive manufacturers when they decide which software to bundle with their drives, as a bundled version of "Nero for Linux" might influence Linux-using customers to buy their drives.
P.S. Please don't post HTML to this mailing list.
Paul.
