Other Software > Found Deals and Discounts

New Raxco Product : Defragmenter - Optimizer ; $9.99 until 2007-05-13

<< < (4/5) > >>

Lashiec:
Yeah, of course :). Carol's typos ;D

EDIT: Your signature is hilarious!

Curt:
Yeah, of course :). Carol's typos ;D

EDIT: Your signature is hilarious!
-Lashiec (May 11, 2007, 01:40 PM)
--- End quote ---

Carol is forgiven.  ;)

Glad you like the sig' - it is brand new, though it has been for a long time in my Profile, under "Biography of this user". But I finally realized that hardly no-one would ever see it there... Did YOU (: anyone) ever check this feature on DC?
 :tellme:

edbro:
Other than those two benefits you may as well use the built in defragger (which Microsoft actually derived from DiskKeeper under license but with most additional functionality removed).
-Carol Haynes (May 11, 2007, 12:34 PM)
--- End quote ---

Quote from "XP Myths", http://mywebpages.comcast.net/SupportCD/XPMyths.html
Myth - "The built-in Disk Defragmenter is good enough."

Reality - "This statement would be true if the built-in defragmenter was fast, automatic, and customizable. Unfortunately, the built-in defragmenter does not have any of these features. The built-in defragmenter takes many minutes to hours to run. It requires that you keep track of fragmentation levels, you determine when performance has gotten so bad you have to do something about it, and then you manually defragment each drive using the built-in defragmentation tool." - Source - Comparison Chart (PDF)

Disk Defragmenter Limitations - "The Disk Defragmenter tool is based on the full retail version of Diskeeper by Executive Software International, Inc. The version that is included with Microsoft Windows 2000 and later provides limited functionality in maintaining disk performance by defragmenting volumes that use the FAT, the FAT32, or the NTFS file system. The XP version has the following limitations." - Source

- It can defragment only local volumes.
- It can defragment only one volume at a time.
- It cannot defragment one volume while scanning another.
- It cannot be easily scheduled without scripts or third party utilities
- It can run only one Microsoft Management Console (MMC) snap-in at a time.
--- End quote ---

Carol Haynes:
OK Fair enough I suppose - but personally I would never defrag more than one volume at a time (what's the point - it will probably still take twice as long - or longer if they are on the same physical disc) and I don't use scheduling because I don't like my computer suddenly launching into something disc/memory intensive just when I have started burning a DVD or doing something else that requires the computer to run smoothly.

As for speed - given that Windows defragmenter IS DiskKeeper (sorry about the typo before ;)) I can't see how DiskKeeper runs faster! Perfect Disk runs at about the same speed in my opinion.

All the speed gains on the websites are highly eggagerated (my experience anyway). They may be a bit faster but it isn't hugely significant as far as I can tell.

The speed of defragging depends much more on how long it is since you last defragged your system than what software you are using.

Darwin:
Curt wrote:Glad you like the sig' - it is brand new, though it has been for a long time in my Profile, under "Biography of this user". But I finally realized that hardly no-one would ever see it there... Did YOU (: anyone) ever check this feature on DC?
--- End quote ---

I quite often check people's profiles... Even if they don't have a bio. Always nice to know a bit about the people that comprise the community - where they come from, if they have a webpage, etc.!

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page