Talk:Nero Multimedia Suite

August 2005

IS it safe to have more than one CD Burning Software on the same computer? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.220.244.143 (talk) 17:20, 27 August 2005

Wrong place to ask, but:

On Windows, not really. There can be big conflicts, particularly with EasyCD Creator and Nero on XPSP2.

On anything else, yes.

--Kiand 17:23, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

You sure? Only problem I have is that one of them occasionally stops working, usually after the other has been updated. I'm more worried at the bloatness of their updaters. Smoothy 20:52, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

I usually find that the CD drive stops working entirely due to conflicting filters installed, but thats just my experience. anyway, wrong place to ask. --Kiand 00:59, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Here's a tip: Don't trust Nero's verify results --Paul 13:04, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

UDF is not mandatory on DVD's

DVD's do not require UDF. UDF is only required for a file system larger than 4GB.

It's perfectly "legal" to use ISO9660 on a DVD, which is in fact what most software distributed on DVD uses, when the total amount on the DVD is less than 4GB. —Preceding unsigned comment added by RealThanny (talk • contribs) 01:38, 19 April 2006

Yes this is completely true and I have removed the line "(actually an invalid format as DVDs are required to use UDF)" accordingly. Although I'm a bit unsure about your 4GB line. Are you sure it's true? I know ISO9660 doesn't support files larger then 2GB but I've never read of any 4GB total file systme limit and I'm pretty sure I've seen commercially mastered DVDs with ISO9660 larger then 4GB (some even dual layer IIRC). Nil Einne 12:56, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Nero 6 uses the ISO9660 filesystem on DVDs larger than 4 GB. It will use it on Dual layer disks which is probably why not much will read them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 20.133.0.13 (talk) 09:05, 10 July 2006 They certainly don't work in any DVD video player that I have tried (those that accept DVD+R9s in the first place). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 20.133.0.14 (talk) 09:16, 10 July 2006

The 2gig ISO9660 filesize limit is why .VOB files of DVD videos are no larger than 2gig each. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.136.145.200 (talk) 03:30, 18 June 2006

The 2 Gb file limit comes about because of a mis-feature of the windows 9x product line. The FAT32 file system supports a theoretical maximum file size of 4 Gb. Unfortunately the Windows 9x product line interprets the file size as a signed number, and thus reports any file larger than 2 Gb as having a negative size. Some applications, aware of the limitation were able to internally correct the error and work with files between 2 Gb and 4 Gb. The 2 Gb limit on DVD file sizes is to prevent this problem occuring. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 20.133.0.14 (talk) 09:16, 10 July 2006

I dont know where you guys get this crap (referring to the previous post)... 2Gb IS a ISO 9660 limitation. The problem is that ISO 9660 save the file size in a 32 bit value. In signed values (normally used), the last bit is used as signal (+,-), making the 32 bits only cover up to 2Gb. Although a program can treat the number as unsigned (which expand the maximum file size up to 4Gb), not all platforms and programs will read it (as it is not specified to use unsigned value in ISO 9660). ISO 9660 still have a feature to circumvent it (the multi-extend feature, which fragment a large file). However, not all platforms support it. Maybe it is why Nero choose not supporting it (or they are just lazy). Read more here: ISO_9660#The_2_GB_file_size_limit. SSPecter ^talk ♠ _{13:21, 3 February 2007 (UTC)}.

Does Nero Recode 2 support the DVD-R format? And if so, how do I activate the capability? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.148.122.251 (talk) 05:51, 22 June 2006

Updated screenshot?

The current screenshot on the page is of the previous version of Nero, version 6. Could anyone take & submit an updated screenshot of the current version, version 7? —S3BST3R 04:23, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Disc speed problems

Nero Burning ROM has issues with supporting all the speeds a drive and CD-RW or DVD-+RW disc support.

I have an Ultra Speed CD-R/DVD+-RW (+R only for dual layer) drive made by LG. I had Nero 6 and on some 24x Memorex CD-RW discs it would only allow them to be used at 10x or 16x. At 16x they would not burn without CRC errors. I upgraded to Nero 7.0.5.4 and now 24x is allowed but 10x is gone! Great 'upgrade'! Now these particular discs cannot be used at all on this 2.35Ghz PC.

I also have some HP 12x High speed CD-RW discs. Nero 6 would only allow them to be used at 10x. Nero 7 does the same.

This non-support for ALL speeds a drive and CD-RW disc supports has been a long time problem with Nero Burning ROM. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.136.145.200 (talk) 03:38, 18 June 2006

Here’s something that might related to this, I was trying to install TES: Oblivion on my computer. I received an error saying that my DVD-RW drive is not a valid win 32 application. When I explored the folders on the Disk, it would not allow me to use the install program by way of the same error. I looked up this problem online, and found that Nero actually interferes with this somehow. Why it ONLY does this to Oblivion instead of The Matrix - Path of Neo OR Half Life 2, which I both own I have not a clue... just an fyi. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.248.33.30 (talk) 21:23, 27 September 2006

Nero StartSmart merge proposal

As far as I'm aware StartSmart is simply a part of the Nero package (essentially a more beginner-friendly frontend for the other software components like Burning ROM, BackItUp, etc.), which is why I proposed a merge with the very short article on it. Comments? Objections? ~ Matticus78 19:27, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Agree. If each and every small tool is listed on its own page, we would need a Nero-pedia. As a matter of fact, there are 22 Nero 7 apps installed on this computer. Howewer, If anyone feels like writing it, a proper list of significant modules on Nero Burning Rom page might be somewhat helpful. (e.g. as a bulleted list) --Emre D. 02:45, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Strongly Agree It could make sense to have an article about individual Nero apps, if any of them are worthy, notable, useful and widely used, et cetera ... but I think most people see them as a single package and it's more appropriate to have a single article.

Agree. Fire 00:19, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Agree. --Samweber 02:18, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Agree. --ozzmosis 06:10, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Agree. Both articles are too small anyways. Joining them would only make sense. But this means the Nero article would need to be cleaned up. --Zrulli 04:14, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Clunkiness

Although I use Nero as my burning software after evaluating a handful, and it has an aweful lot of useful functionality, I find the user interface(s?) clunky, and sometimes confusing. My opinion on the matter isn't reason enough to list this as a complaint in an encyclopedia article, but ... if a significant number of users feel the same way, perhaps it would make sense to add a section for 'criticisms?' Plenty of other ( usually, longer ) articles have this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by DigitalEnthusiast (talk • contribs) 22:51, 12 December 2006

Criticisms section: Although during installation of the regular Nero suite many unwanted or unused components can be removed and not installed.

It may sound as there is no need for a Lite version because the official installer provides facilities for completely selective setup. This is not the case. Some stuff that gets installed anyway: shell toolbar, DirectShow libraries contributing to "Codec hell".

I believe the sentence should be changed to ..unwanted features can be unselected, several components of limited use get installed anyways. -- 83.99.184.75 18:43, 3 March 2007 (UTC) (J7n)

I've changed it to: Note that while many components can be removed using the official installer, several components of limited use are not listed and thus are not made optional.

How does this sound to you? I'm trying to be impartial by noting what can be done normally vs. what made these alternative installers so useful to people. —GrimRevenant 03:03, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

I have restored the Criticisms section with a good reference from The Inquirer about the Nero Lite and Nero Micro installers. (updatepack.nl appears to be down presently). This makes the section stronger. I have also attempted to reword in a more objective manner, again. —GrimRevenant 06:55, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Nero 7 Review link

Can we get rid of it or replace it with higher quality reviews? Fairly useless as it stands I think.Thadk 06:01, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

References + link cleanup

Well, I've found references for every detail which was tagged "citation needed", and converted various in-text links to <ref> format. Many of these are from primary sources (mainly the Nero website), but where possible I've found others. In addition, I've cleaned out the external links section – we don't need links to a dozen difference CD writing apps, the link to List of optical disc authoring software is enough. diff ― GrimRevenant 08:05, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Nomenclature

i find it interesting about the naming of the software. im not sure how to word it, but i think it would be valuable to mention that as ROMe is a reference to rome, ROM is also a direct reference to a CD-ROM. the_undertow ^talk 10:24, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

I thought that was pretty self-evident? That's why it's mentioned as a play on words, because in this context "ROM" can be taken to mean either Rome or a (CD-) ROM. —GrimRevenant 07:23, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

it would only be self-evident if it mentioned CD-ROM in the actual section. your explanation is more thorough than the explanation given. my point is that a non-computer person may not see the correlation between ROM and ROMe, unless it's explained - just like you did. the_undertow ^talk 23:11, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

On thinking about it, you're probably right. While we're have no trouble picking this up, somebody not particularly familiar with computing terms/jargon may just think of it as a funny name. Might see if I can work this in somehow. —GrimRevenant 00:26, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

You're right, that is tricky to work in. Section now reads:

The program's name is intended to be a play on words. Recording CD- and DVD-ROMs is often known as "burning", and the infamous Roman Emperor Nero is said to have played his lyre as Rome burned. This pun is more obvious in the original German as the German name for Rome is Rom (a literal English translation would be Nero Burning ROMe). Also, the program logo is an image of the Roman Colosseum in flames.

I'm trying to specifically mention the term "CD-ROM", which a reader may be unaware of, while not coming off as insulting the reader's intelligence. Did it work? —GrimRevenant 00:45, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

it looks good. instead of insulting them with the explanation of a rom, the hyperlink will get the point across. ive had nero for a decade, and honestly thought the reference was only in relation to 'burning.' i never made the correlation between ROM and ROMe. now about the german part. is that OR ;? the_undertow ^talk 00:50, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Now isn't that interesting? I didn't pick up on the Emperor Nero connection for a couple of years – I just thought it was a cool, German-style name, and never really thought about it until one time I fired it up after reading a book which featured Nero. Of course, we never really did Roman history in school... I guess we just showed why both bits are necessary.
As for the German angle, check out de:Rom, which we could link to if we really wanted. ;) —GrimRevenant 01:21, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

haha, my last name may be Kochendorfer, but you lost me on that page. since rom = rome, i guess it wouldnt need a source. but is it 'burning ROM' or is burning also translated into german? the_undertow ^talk 01:31, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I don't really speak or read German either (or Dutch, despite my surname, Visser, being Dutch), but it at least "proved" the point about the spelling of "Rom". Interestingly, the de:Nero Burning ROM article has a Namensgeschichte (Babelfish: "Name History") section as the very first section header! I checked the Deutsch version of the Nero website and they call it "Nero Burning ROM" there, too, so there's no localised German name. —GrimRevenant 02:52, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

References

Version history

I've added a version history section to list some of the major versions of the software. I've added whatever information I could get. Must be expanded further.

Aeons | Talk 06:01, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Nero Burning Rom is Marketleader

Why is this fact missing.? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.180.236.146 (talk) 20:58, 26 April 2007

Because you haven't established it as fact? What's your source? Why don't you add it to the article yourself? Ham Pastrami 01:18, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

I dont know what it is, thats why I made the article... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.153.204.116 (talk) 01:01, 27 May 2007

MOVIE ON TO DISK

Does anybody know why, when i use nero 6 and try to put a song on in the background it does not work. Even when it says in the capacity info part that i am not even using up to 4GB, a extra coating of light blue occurs at the very start of the capacity info Risteard B 20:43, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

This is not a tech support forum. Ham Pastrami 01:21, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

well since this is a problem im having with my nero, maybe someone who knows the answer could then enter it into the article mentioning that it as a fault before people go out and pay for it!!!!Risteard B 14:23, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

lol --125.168.43.174 (talk) 00:54, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

Super Link

I made the article and it's already a crappy redirect, it still doesn't expalin what Super Link is, thats a mis use of the redirect feature. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Realg187 (talk • contribs) 01:05, 27 May 2007

Well, now it's been deleted – is that better?

No, noob is this site was really a wiki then NOTHING WOULD BE DELETED! The purpose of a wiki is to inform, not make crappy redirects or vandalize pages!

• 06:13, 30 May 2007 Masamage (Talk | contribs) deleted "Super Link" (content was: '{{db-empty}}Super Link is a feature in Nero burning software.')

"SuperLink" is just one company's name for their implementation of buffer underrun protection technology for CD/DVD burners. LG calls it SuperLink, Plextor BurnProof, Yamaha SafeBurn, et cetera ad nauseum. What's in a name? —GrimRevenant 13:24, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Evil

Why would they name it after and evil person? The software is great, but still. Doesn't that offend anyone? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Realg187 (talk • contribs) 01:05, 27 May 2007

Because a. he's a celebrity and b. he could be considered an expert in burning, as he's been known to appreciate the artistic value of burning (of Rome). Maurog 10:35, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Doesnt it make people mad at all?? One would think there would be controversy over that! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.345.678.912 (talk) 01:26, 2 June 2007

It doesn't offend me. Maybe if they called it Hitler BurningJEW or something... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.109.195.180 (talk) 00:29, 11 June 2007

1. Evil is opinion, I didn't know Nero personally so I can't say he was evil or not, he did bad things maybe, but still, "evil" feels like the wrong word to me. 2. He's famus, well known as stated above. 3. Also as stade above, naming it Hitler would be much more bad, since Hitler happede in modern times. No one will be angry for using the name of an emperor in ancient Rome. 81.225.4.181 13:03, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

I am mad, this is is evil.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Special:Contributions/person (User talk:person) 00:50, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

I ma adam, hit sis live. —Preceding unsigned comment added by A plague of rainbows (talk • contribs) 18:47, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Nero Linux Incompatibility

When I tired to use Nero Linux add files to a multisession disk I made in Windows, it overwrited the old files and only put the new ones. is that normal? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Realg187 (talk • contribs) 01:05, 27 May 2007

Japanese language pack

I would like to save some Japanese files with Nero Burning ROM 6.3. I believe I will need to install the Japanese language file I found at the link http://www.nero.com/nero6/eng/sp_file.php?spla=jpn but I do not know if that will be sufficient. Has anybody succeeded in doing what I want to do?

ICE77 -- 81.104.129.226 22:29, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

From the talk page heading:

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Nero Burning ROM article.

This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.

You might want to try the Reference Desk, a section of Wikipedia designed for asking questions. Please take note that asking questions like this on talk pages is not likely to get you an answer. You're more likely to have luck on a relevant forum or discussion board. Cheers. —GrimRevenant 12:08, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Version history cleanup

First, I've done a bit of reformatting on the tables to make them slightly more uniform and hopefully more useful. Centring text does not work when you combine wildly varying cell text lengths. Dates are ISO 8601 for more uniformity, conciseness and ease of comparison. Also, I've removed releases that didn't have notes – if you dispute their non-notability, make note. ;)

Secondly, what purpose does the version history serve? Sure, Nero AG don't seem to keep much record, but there are several off-wiki sites that keep much more detailed version histories than we do. Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. We should probably note dates of major releases/important features, but I'm thinking they should be in prose format, not a table. Tables add mess and clutter, and really shouldn't be used if you don't have to, which I don't think we do. Anyone else's thoughts? —GrimRevenant 17:34, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

I agree concerning listing only major versions. Prose could be used to talk about major differences between version, e.g between 4 and 3, as well as talk about it in a more general context (E.g: as from version x.x, Ahead AG changed its name to Nero to better...) and for readers who just want a general overview. I think it would be good to leave some of it in tabular format at the end of the prose. It quickly summarises information and could use more technical terms (API, UDF, etc. for more technical readers).

Concerning Nero AG not keeping a version history, that's part of the purpose of wikipedia. Long after a major product or even the company is gone, wikipedia will keep a trace of it (Assuming that wikipedia survives longer than the sites specifically devoted to these subjects). Concerning the 3rd party sites given as references, www.afterdawn.com does not give information about versions prior to v5.5.7.8 while videohelp.com does not give information about versions prior to v6. Can Nero AG's own nero6 page be considered 3rd party?

Just some suggestions. Aeons | Talk 10:12, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Nero Components

Application	Latest Version
Nero Home	2.0.16.0
Nero StartSmart	3.10.1.0
Nero ProductSetup	1.6.47.0
Nero Burning ROM	3.10.1.0
Nero Express	7.10.1.0
Nero SoundTrax	2.10.1.0
Nero WaveEditor	3.10.1.0
Nero BackItUp	2.10.3.2
Nero CoverDesigner	2.10.1.1
Nero PhotoSnap	1.2.0.25
Nero PhotoSnap Viewer	1.2.0.25
Nero Recode	2.5.5.0
Nero Vision	4.9.7.2
Nero ShowTime	3.10.1.0
Nero Mobile	1.4.0.9
Nero MediaHome	2.5.16.0
Nero ImageDrive	3.0.0.12
Nero CD-DVD Speed	4.7.7.0
Nero DriveSpeed	3.0.11.1
Nero InfoTool	4.4.2.0
Nero BurnRights	2.1.0.10
Nero Scout	2.0.16.0

Note: The above table was moved from the main article for discussion.

I think that it will be useless to list the components version. They are part of the Nero software suite and should therefore be mentioned only as part of the main program. For some of the major components, a prose section (with all references!) could be written. Else, this has the possibility of becoming very messy in the long term.

Anyone has other opinions? Aeons | Talk 07:47, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Nero AG article is short, and this could so there to add content there and clean up here, and I guess it belongs there anyways as that article for for all of Nero. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.153.204.116 (talk) 02:17, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Move Nero!

I think we should move to Nero (computer software) only because Nero Buring ROM was an old name and now it's simply called Nero —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hippy deluxe (talk • contribs) 10:11, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

That's a pity nobody noticed this request and the page has been moved. The reason provided above is unsourced and blatantly false. Here is the source: a list of "applications" that currently belong to Nero 8 Ultra Edition "suite". The fifth entry of the list is "Nero Burning ROM 8 – Expert CD and DVD Burning". As this article clearly DOES NOT, and should not, cover the whole suite (which includes about 25 applications, including PhotoSnap or WaveEditor), I propose to move it back to old name. --Kubanczyk 11:41, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

It doesn't matter. It is indeed computer software and the page name needs to be as descriptive as possible. Wikidudeman ^(talk) 17:38, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

I don't understand your argument, don't even know if you are opposing or supporting the move. --Kubanczyk 06:57, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Having the article named "Nero Buring ROM" is confusing. I didn't even know that it was a software before reading it. It's best to name it "Nero (computer software)" and then specify it's precise name in the article itself, so that it doesn't confuse new readers but still lets those familiar with the software understand. Wikidudeman ^(talk) 13:09, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

There is about 25 very different programs now that all are "Nero something". I understand that for you Nero is a WP:COMMONNAME for Nero Buring ROM and maybe Nero Express. I would agree two years ago, but now I don't. Let's wait for a third opinion then. I'll add temporary explanation to the article. --Kubanczyk 15:49, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

What about "Nero Buring ROM (computer software)? Wikidudeman ^(talk) 15:53, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

I agree with the proposal to move back to its original name and I disagree with needless disambiguation tags -- disambiguation exists to disambiguate, not to move the category into the title. If you don't know what "Nero Burning ROM" is, read the article and find out, that's why it's here. But furthermore, there's only two likely reasons why should have ended up at this article in the first place -- you typed "nero burning rom" into the search box in which case this is where you want to be, or you went to Nero (disambiguation) where this article is listed under Software. So I don't see that it's necessary to have a disambig tag when there is no other article by this name and the disambig page makes it sufficiently clear that this article is about software. Ham Pastrami 14:05, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

FYI: Article has been split, bundle info has been left here and program info went to the original name Nero Burning ROM. --Kubanczyk (talk) 22:56, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Nero for Macintosh

For a short time (ca 2002~2004), Nero produced a Macintosh version called NeroMAX. It was only available in OEM bundles. All links to information about NeroMAX at ahead.de or nero.com have been redirected to the main page. The last version I know about is 1.68. Try digging up http://www.nero.com/en/neromax_yamaha.htm with the web archive. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bizzybody (talk • contribs) 00:03, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Nero7 big256.png

Image:Nero7 big256.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 06:37, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:NeroLinux3.png

Image:NeroLinux3.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 06:40, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Nerolinux3.png

Image:Nerolinux3.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

Nero OEM

82.36.215.64 (talk) 22:14, 18 October 2008 (UTC)Duffaboy82.36.215.64 (talk) 22:14, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

Any chance of a mention of the OEM versions are these limited in anyway ?

BetacommandBot 06:43, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Criticism?

Greetings, everyone.

As I'm writing this, the "Criticism" section of this article suffers from the following issues and requires your attention:

1. This section uses weasel words. Example:

A large installer contains many features perceived as unnecessary by many experienced users

Who are these "experienced users"? How "experienced" are they? How do they "perceive" so? Do non-"experienced" users not perceive so? If not, is it because of their ignorance or difference of preferences? Above all, which source says so?

2. This section contains unverifiable claims about Nero suite that are not covered by its sources. Example:

One of the factors that produces even more criticism is the fact that the latest Nero 9 needs .NET Framework 3.0 to run.

No source is provided to support this allegation. (Also note another example of use weasel words.)

3. This section contains POV statements. While it's main source is only a mild article titled "Nero Lite" and "Nero Micro": smaller sometimes is better, this section virtually claims that the whole world is accusing Nero of software bloat:

Nero AG has been accused of software bloat due to its slow evolution from a simple, efficient burning program to an oversized home entertainment package.

Contrary to such allegations, the aforementioned article explicitly states:

...some people -prestigious and influential pundits, indeed- claim that software bloat doesn't exist and some go as far as to say that feature bloat is a myth...

Although the author quotes another user who have accused Nero of software bloat, expresses disagreement with these "influential pundits" and suggests Nero Lite and Nero Micro, he does not mention anything about anyone else having the same idea. (Please note two more issues in this statement: (1) Use of weasel word and (2) Unverifiable allegations.)

4. The structure and tone of this section is unacceptable. For example:

While many components can be removed using the official installer, its large size and the inability to remove all undesired components via its interface make these alternatives desirable. A valid Nero license key is still required for all installations.

As you can see, the sentences talking about different subjects are written in mixed fashion. One sentence is criticizing Nero (without adequate sources, and using weasel words) and the other is giving seemingly-unrelated information about Nero Micro and Nero Lite, as if it is advertising them or trying to justify something. (Please note another issue: Lack of source for the first sentence.)

I'm tagging this section appropriately. Fleet Command (talk) 09:45, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Alright then; Nobody wishes to take action? No? Then, I'm deleting this section. Fleet Command (talk) 19:43, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

ImageDrive

I have updated the article to reflect that ImageDrive was removed from version 9. Could someone verify what versions it was actually present in? It would probably be useful to provide that information in the article.BcRIPster (talk) 20:50, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the info. Actually, Nero ImageDrive is not included in the source, so no further verification for its non-inclusion in Nero 9 is not necessary. However, we need a source that actually says this tool was present. Fleet Command (talk) 19:43, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Outdated as of May 2010

Hi, everyone.

As of this writing, this article is outdated. Nero is no longer releasing a Nero software suite. It is now releasing two products instead: Nero Multimedia Suite 10 and Nero Burning ROM 10.

An update is required.

Fleet Command (talk) 04:46, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Update: I deleted the entry about "InCD" since this drive is not a part of the software anymore. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Neccelle (talk • contribs) 15:35, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

Sentence fragment

The article says "Nero Vision has been renamed Nero Video by Nero 11,The product is available separately video editing software tool capable of mixing video clips and authoring DVDs."

This wording has been in the article for a while. I don't know if it was an accident resulting from good faith editing or vandalism. Assuming the first comma should be a period then

• What is "Nero Vision?" It's never mentioned in the article other than this fragment.
• Who or what is "Nero 11?"

For now, I removed this fragment from the article. --Marc Kupper|talk 19:02, 11 January 2014 (UTC)