Nero for Vista means no DirectX 10

[FijiJohn]

The new Nero 7.5.7.0, which supports Vista has been released but to install it you are REQUIRED to "upgrade" from DX10 down to DX 9.0C. Anyone have any idea why this is? Seems pretty lame to me. (Obviously I am using Vista [the RTM Ultimate version]).

[AllGamer]

it makes no sense

how can you "upgrade" something when you are Downgrading it instead?

and why in the world would Nero require Direct X? it's just a burner software

i don't install any additional ****

go into Custom install, and remove everything else, only install the Burner portion

[FijiJohn]

Unfortunately, in this new Vista-ready version, the very first thing it does when you go to install it is insist on the "upgrade" to the older version of DX. You cannot get to any options for Custom install unless you FIRST let it dump your DX 10. The only reason I want to use Nero is because I have a huge cache of CDs and DVDs in the .nrg format. I'd use Gear Video exclusively but it cannot open and burn the nrg images. There now are 13(!!!) separate apps in the Nero 7 package. You cannot get just Nero Burning ROM or Nero Express by itself. Maybe someone should have told Ahead how unlucky the number 13 is.

[rockinup1231]

Sorta off topic question. By your opinion fiji, what's better, Nero or Sonic.

[FijiJohn]

Better for what, exactly? In my experience, both have been fine for simply copying discs but I have had far fewer problems in general over the years with Nero than Roxio/Sonic. I have not tried Sonic/Roxio 8 (mostly because of negative comments and reviews). I was pretty happy with Nero 6 enterprise and would keep using it if it worked with Vista. (I love tinkering with new software but I am beginning to regret the jump to Vista.)

[rockinup1231]

I mean't overall.

I've never used Nero, but heard its gewd.

Roxio is pretty good, but Sonic is simpler.

[Rabbitrunner51]

Alot better than the more visually lawded Roxio. Also, there ARE other burning software out there somewhere..

Think about it. Even though Vista is or has been released.. They are still working on DX10. It in final yet. Also, as is software updates , which this is, why make it a DX10 requirement, which would mean everyone would have to use that... as the latest edition?? Make perfect sense!

[porsch1909]

Why would you need DX10 anyway?

Aren't all games only DX9 compatible?

[FijiJohn]

They don't have to make 10 required; just don't make me replace DX10 with DX9 to burn CDs and DVDs. None of the calls in 9 will bomb under 10. IMO this is simply sloppy coding. Several new games are coming out that can take advantage of DX10 features - which you won't get if you use this version of nero.

[rockinup1231]

They don't have to make 10 required; just don't make me replace DX10 with DX9 to burn CDs and DVDs. None of the calls in 9 will bomb under 10. IMO this is simply sloppy coding. Several new games are coming out that can take advantage of DX10 features - which you won't get if you use this version of nero.

Eventually all future games will use DX10, but untill then, I wouldn't sweat it.

[Imperion1]

When you install Nero 7, did it give you the option for Express or Custom Settings? Most software does.

[Plaster]

When you install Nero 7, did it give you the option for Express or Custom Settings? Most software does.

Nope, I installed in on Vista Home lastnight and the absolute first interactive screen you see wants you to "upgrade" to DX 9.0c.

[Rabbitrunner51]

I can see our point.. if indeed they say 'UPGRADE' , when in fact most of us have DX9.0c . None of us really want to dis MS all the time. I would like nothng better than to lawd them , if in fact those boys would have or use some common sense.
They want everybody to run right out and buy Vista, when in truth, every single highly rated tech. journal and top tech writers, are saying theere is no real reason for getting it, unlees you like the interface thing. I guess they dodn't want to wait for the DX10 to get completed becfore they start making money. Thats obvious.

I know its going to be along time till i get it. To spend a minimum or $200.00 for a basic home edition ,which by the way all the techies say is worthless as a upgrade on up from there for the others, and with alot of the software makers still not up to par with it , not to mention drivers. Also, with thier track record of late, if you do have something that does not work or is not compatible, then it might be six months or longer before our able to use it.
Thats why if yu do have it, it makes the most sense to keep XP, and if you want the Vista, tehn just use two partitions or two HD's.

That really doesn't make much sense. I mean, if you take a novice for instance, he may not even get the point...

[rockinup1231]

XP has less bugs and more updates. I myself, if I could afford Vista, wouldn't bother until they came out with a second service pack. Windows XP was still pretty buggy after the first service pack.

Besides, the wait should bring Vista's price down to a reasonable, if not a steal (depending on it's success, which ain't lookin' to good).

[Rabbitrunner51]

Here in ttown, one of Major all in one shopping centers, has the Home edition of Vista selling for $99.00 That should give ya a clue as to what its worth.

Anyways, i'm getting kind of off topic here... I just take the attitude of wait and see. Just wise common sense, esp. in regards to this whole Vista thing. There is enough blog online evrywhere ,esp. in my emails to fill anybody with some objective answers.

If one was to do some searching i guess any of this about DX10 is outpoured there as well.