Nero 8 Ultra Edition...most stable update?

I have been given a Nero 8 Ultra boxed edition for my other notebook and wondered if there is a stable version that is out???

I have had the software for awhile but each time I have been in the forums here I have had the feeling that the new Version was buggy??
Or is this a misunderstanding on my part?
If there is a stable version of it, then I would install the cd on my other notebook.

All comments would be appreciated, thank you.

 

Just wondering if there is a stable version as I noticed no replies ?
Thank you. I respect the comments of experienced users.

 

Hi again, I still see that I have had no recommendation of a Stable version of the Ultra 8 which is sitting in its original box waiting to be installed on my newer Toshiba notebook.
However, I have read that the program is buggy and so I come here to ask for recommendations.
I have also been told to look at the purchase version of AShampoo for the additional $12.96 that is required over the Trial Version.
I don't like looking at this Version 8 sitting here in an unopened box and wonder what really are the bugs in this Version that make it so problematic.
Again I look forward to comments, thankyou

 

Here is a link about the problems with Nero 8.


http://forums.afterdawn.com/thread_view.cfm/579890

 

8.3.1.2 is the version I'm using. No problems over a long period of use.

As for the thread mentioned on Nero 8, it was learned early on that there is no problem. Nero changed Nero 8 to where it no longer works with Shrink as a supported burner. Nero isn't responsible for supporting Shrink and they have Recode (either a clone or a very uncanny similarity to Shrink). Shrink is no longer supported, so you can read the tea leaves (no help from that venue). So, with Shrink you can forget the burn with Nero option in Backup after Nero 7.

The last post I made on pg 7 of the thread that rtm27 linked to explains the situation between Shrink and Nero 8 and how to use Express to manually burn the Shrink output. Simply put, Nero 8 is not a Shrink supported program and Nero 8 burns the output as it will similar output from other programs, such as DVD Rebuilder. That means you need to know how to use both Shrink and Nero 8. Use Shrink to output an ISO to the Hard Drive. Use Nero 8 to burn the Shrink ISO, as you would any other ISO image file. For videos you burn output as a video file and not a data file. Some people have made that mistake.

 

@ Appa I repied to your question in cd freaks, and asfar as not being able to use shrink with nero 8 I would like to point out that you don't need shrink if you have nero 8, you have recode which is better and written by the guy who made shrink then went to work for nero

 

Recode better? Maybe if you have Nero 8. Otherwise I'd say they're about even with a little edge going to Shrink for versatility. Shrink still works with my old copy of RI4M. Unless a person needs or wants a big program like Nero (with Recode), there's other transcoders and burners (i.e. Shrink with ImgBurn) that do just as well with a much smaller footprint. That discussion has already been covered.

 

Yes and Recode won, it is much faster and much better. Do you think the man that wrote shrink would go to work for nero and make worse??????????///

 

Maybe as well. Won? Much of what I've seen with Recode is changes to the interface, not the basic program. Point me to the discussion where Nero's Recode won? With Nero you have a glut of programs that rarely, if ever, get used. Nero takes up a lot of space for the program suite so you can have the Recode. Shrink will still do a number of videos by itself (with a supported burner like ImgBurn). Both Shrink and ImgBurn are free (extra points). Recode has always needed an exterior program for decryption. Excuse me, but being so familiar with Shrink, editing with Still Image is still about the easiest way I've found.

How many minutes did you say you saved using the same video files with the same settings used for both Shrink and Recode? I've used the two programs myself and I don't get significantly better times for Recode over Shrink unless I use deep analysis for Shrink and not in Recode. To tell the truth, I don't use either program much nowadays. I use Rebuilder for doing most of my video backups. I prefer a true encoding program over a transcoder any day. I can spare a few more minutes for the increased quality. Plus it's best for those big screens, if much compression is encountered.

 

Comments well taken, however if I already have Nero Ultra 8 in my possession and not yet loaded to my second computer b/c of controversy over the Edition and yet it appears to perform the job well; I see no valid reason not to install it.
Otherwise I may as well throw it out. Now I have spent money on it several months past and used Nero fro many years and see no valid reason as long as the program does its job to not install it.

Does the program install crash my computer? Does the installed program not work to the point that my burned DVD's, CD's will not work on my notebook Nor on a Stand Alone DVD Player nor CD player?

Nero has always been functional for me in the past and that is what I am looking for now normal Functionality..... and I purchased it based on past use and good quality end products that were used on pc's and stand alone units. That is all I want and BTW...I don't install InCD.
Your answers to the above would be appreciated.
Thank you for your time.

 

@ Appa
Are you the same guy i'm answering questions for on cdfreaks? Cause they are the same as your questions about nero and having a copy but being scared to install it??? I won't say the user name of the person on cd freaks that might be you. But if you are let me know cause i hate typing everything twice. LOL

And @ PacMan777 I have all the free programs i can get, and all the paid for ones too. For backing up movies i have been using anydvd and clone dvd2 for a few years now, and i also have dvdfab platinum 4 & 5 to use for some things. I have dvdfick that uses image burn automaticly , dvdfab uses vso, and well you get the idea, i just like 1 click stuff, not having to use a dozen different programs to do a project. But i do respect your opions, and you are right the free ones will do everything you ask them to. Please don't think i am knocking your way, just like things simple, LIKE ME LOL

 

I like simple things to and all I have been trying to establish is that Ultra 8 install is not going to "crash" my machine on install and also that burned dvd and cd will work reliably both on PC and stand alone players as they have in the past.
In other words the program may be bloated to the disgust of some users but if it works...hey I'll use it as I own a copy now.
I just don't want my computer to go down in flames and the "screen of death to appear"!!

thx

 

Who said what I was using is free? LOL Besides RI4M I have AnyDVD for the few RI4M has problems with. My software library looks like a whose who of brand names. RB Pro and CCE aren't free either. I've gravitated to programs I've found to supply the best quality for my criteria.

If you want a 1 click setup, there's always Shrink set up with ImgBurn with AnyDVD for bypassing the newer copy protection. Recode has to use something (as does most of the newer transcoders). That's usually DVDFab HD or AnyDVD. With today's prices for retail software, DVDFab is probably the best buy. It's one of the few "1 does all" programs.

As for RB/CCE, it's faster with files on the HDD. It can burn single output automatically with ImgBurn as the supported burner. Plus, it supplies superior quality over transcoders (Shrink, Recode, CloneDVD 2 and the rest of the breed). Also, I don't have to use a lot of separate commands once I initiate the encode. However, I usually do my backups in batch mode. That way they're done while I'm away from the PC and all I have to do is burn them off when I'm ready. Ease of operation isn't usually a question with my methods. I like things as easy as I can get them. I have a dual core, so I can still multitask while encoding.

@Appa
Listen up. Nero 8 doesn't crash PCs unless the PC doesn't have the resources to run the program or has some abnormal problem. It's worked fine on my XP system and it's been updated for Vista. If you think you have a decent PC, load Nero 8 and check it out. If it happens to cause a crash, simply reboot and delete the program. Nero has a cleaner tool that removes all remnants. If you had older versions of Nero loaded before, it might be an idea to delete the old program and run the Nero cleaner program to clean your files. Remnants of older versions have been known to cause problems. Same goes for going from newer versions to older ones.

So, don't waste any more of your time asking questions. If your PC has the specs, clean 'er up and loader 'er up and let us know what happens with Nero 8.

 

I think that the topic has been well discussed thank you.
The thread should be closed.
Thank you one and all for the variety of suggestions.

 

You're welcome. Variety? Only when we got off on a tangent.

Most of us agree, there's nothing wrong with Nero for burning and encoding, as long as you don't mind a bulky suite. Nero is no longer supported by Shrink (above 7). Nero still does a good job with Shrink output, it just has to be burned manually when using Nero 8. Since it's easier to use Shrink with supported burners, there's no real need to go all the way with the Nero suite, if all you want is to burn Shrink output. In that case set Shrink up with ImgBurn and consider it one program when using Shrink. ImgBurn has a tiny footprint. It doesn't cost a thing except your time and it does as well as the other supported burners.

As far as Nero problems, I noticed many are because users hadn't fully learned how to use the programs. Also, there's a number of people who like to overclock their computers. Nero Vision creates a considerable load and will crash some of those. In retrospect, most of the problems I've seen haven't been as much Nero 8 as it has system and/or user error. Nero 6 was probably the most problematic series of Nero I've seen. Nero 7 was less trouble and Nero 8 has been even less. I've had Nero 8 since it came out and don't remember a problem with it that I didn't create myself. I'm not saying it was perfect, just that I didn't encounter any problems.

 

Nero 6 the most problematic? You have to be joking? From personal experience, Nero 6 was by far the most stable of all 3. Nero 7 was the version that cost Nero its great reputation and as of V8 have not reclaimed the status they have based on my own opinion and the vast majority of users here.

To the thread starter, i wouldnt worry about your computer in general crashing. You might crash Nero and maybe Windows, but your computer will definitely not go up in flames.

 

If you found a stable version and stuck with it, then Nero 6 could be stable. Problem was that Nero was always doing updates with 6 and there were several versions that had problems. If you doubt it, take a look at the old posts in the Nero and Shrink threads. The common advice was "look for a stable version". I took my own advice on this one. With 7 and 8 I got stable versions and didn't/don't update unless there was/is a need.

 

Just don't buy Nero 8, it has a worthless interface and I fail to see where the extra value has gone to now I've upgraded from 6. Last time ever I buy Nero for sure.

 

Let's see... My copy of Nero 8 has worked flawlessly and yours is worthless. There appears to be an interface problem on your end (the end sitting looking at the screen). If you feel 8 is worthless, you should go back to 6. Personally, I don't see much difference in the interface and the updates are to address newer formats and OSs. Plus, there are a few newer options in the suite.

 

Well Said!! My nero 8 works great!!!