Cluttermagnet Posted October 30, 2003 Share Posted October 30, 2003 On the recommendation of other forum members, I downloaded a copy of Diskeeper Lite. I just got around to installing it on my P4 2.4GHz 256M Win98SE box. So far, so good. I read the Help file in DKlite and then did a quick defrag of my c: drive. All went well, and it did seem to do the job pretty fast, as advertized. I compared how the two utilities did their analysis, and after running DKlite, I found that Norton claims my c: drive is still 1 percent fragmented. It had indicated 5 percent fragmentation prior to running DKlite.It looks to me like Norton is more precise about just how fragmented your drive is. DKlite, by contrast, uses verbal descriptions but does not seem to give any exact figures as to how fragmented it thinks your drive is. I noticed in the Help file that it mentions sometimes you might need to do successive runs to really complete defragging as far as it can go. Among several questions I have right now, I'm wondering if Norton might be more thorough? I don't remember Norton ever failing to claim 0 percent fragmentation after a single run. So it is saying in effect that DKlite mostly got the job done, but not completely? I'd appreciate hearing comments about these and other utilities. What has your experience been? And just how do you compare two different defrag utilities which do the same job but by different methods? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prelude76 Posted October 30, 2003 Share Posted October 30, 2003 i tend to avoid having to defrag. all that head moving back and forth, i'm sure it causes quite a bit of wear and tear on the drive, so i wouldnt be running it 2 or 3 times consecutevily just to get a slight performance increase at the expense of risking premature failure.I've used both norton and diskeeper, and i'd go for diskeeper anyday over any products from symantec. If people realized how much faster and less CPU intensive the virus scanner from F-Prot is compare to Norton AV, there would be a mass exodus. as for my defrager of choice, i use Fix-It Utilities's JetDefrag. I dont think it defrags to 100% either on one pass, but it uses some clusterring technology that shoves common files to front of partition, uncommon to middle, and rarely accessed files to end, splitting the free space remaining in between these areas. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zox Posted October 30, 2003 Share Posted October 30, 2003 They all use different technologies to defrag the volumes.One software can move all small files under 300 Kb to the start of the disk while others are going for small files under 500 Kb for e.g.You will never have the same defrag nor result with two different defrag utilities.I am with Prelude on Norton as it seems to screw up too many times.We are using Mac's at work and our only utillity is Norton.Every time you run it, it finds problem to repair and after repair it says everything is fixed and gives you list of "fixed" files.However as soon as you quit Norton and start it again i finds again same files with a same problems, but not fixed,What is it, lying about it??Anyway in the past I have enountered only problems from Norton and long time ago I decided to stay away from it.I never regreted such decision.I also have come to realize that less you temper with your system, smaller chance of screwing it up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rons Posted October 30, 2003 Share Posted October 30, 2003 I also have come to realize that less you temper with your system, smaller chance of screwing it up.Good point. The less you mess with things the better your system will work. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prelude76 Posted October 30, 2003 Share Posted October 30, 2003 I also have come to realize that less you temper with your system, smaller chance of screwing it up.Good point. The less you mess with things the better your system will work. ditto on that seems like everytime i got on a tweaking ramping, modifying every registry tweak i can think of, i always get a full system meltdown and have to re-install my system a month or so after. so now, i just fight the urge and do a couple of no-brainer tweaks and that's it. no more registry cleaning for me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
epp_b Posted October 30, 2003 Share Posted October 30, 2003 Tab me up as a Norton user. I use SpeedDisk. Anything is better than the standard Windows crap defragmenter. SpeedDisk can defrag my 3 gig partition in about 6-8 minutes, after being 50% fragmented.I've used DiskKeeper before. My opinion is that its OK, but it's certainly not "transparent" as they advertise it be. That, and the interface is cumbersome, clunky, and ugly. Norton does have it's problems, but interface design isn't one of them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ThunderRiver Posted October 30, 2003 Share Posted October 30, 2003 I highly recommend Diskeeper v8 ProfessionalUnlike any other defrag programs, you now can actually work while the disk is actively defragging.In older versions such as version 7, you are most likely going stop working while it is defragging. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GolfProRM Posted October 30, 2003 Share Posted October 30, 2003 I've got DK7 Pro and love it... I never need to do a defrag while I'm working so it works well to have it scheduled to run at 3:00AM I'm quite happy with my purchase! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest genaldar Posted October 30, 2003 Share Posted October 30, 2003 If people realized how much faster and less CPU intensive the virus scanner from F-Prot is compare to Norton AV, there would be a mass exodus.I don't think they're less processor intensive. At least not the office scan (network) version is very processor intensive. And you add that on top of the fact that F-Protect regularly comes in towards the bottom of every av software roundup and it doesn't look to be such a good choice. **** it even failed to detect eicar when I tested it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ibe98765 Posted October 30, 2003 Share Posted October 30, 2003 i tend to avoid having to defrag. all that head moving back and forth, i'm sure it causes quite a bit of wear and tear on the drive, so i wouldnt be running it 2 or 3 times consecutevily just to get a slight performance increase at the expense of risking premature failure.Modern disks generally have a high MTBF number. My SCSI disks are between 800,000-1,000,000 hours each which is around 100 years of continuous usage. Head movement is not going to cause the drive to wear out prematurely. If your system operating temperatures stay within spec, you shouldn't have any problems with most disks. Of course, if you buy an el cheapo, off brand disk... Personally, I have never had a hard disk failure although the first disk I had in my original PC which I brought back in 1993 (500MB) did eventually wear out after about 5 years. Technology has advanced quite a bit since then however.That being said, I run an automatic defrag twice a week (and have been doing this for years) and I use Raxco's Perfect Disk (http://www.raxco.com/). I think Raxco has a better solution than DiskKeeper. However, support can be somewhat spotty but generally you don't need to contact support anyway. I was contacting them to make some suggestions and ask some esoteric tech questions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ranger Bob Posted October 31, 2003 Share Posted October 31, 2003 I highly recommend Diskeeper v8 ProfessionalUnlike any other defrag programs, you now can actually work while the disk is actively defragging.In older versions such as version 7, you are most likely going stop working while it is defragging.I agree. I had used Diskeeper Pro version 7 and never had any problems running it anytime I wished and version 8 is just as good and possibly a little faster. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corrine Posted October 31, 2003 Share Posted October 31, 2003 Having run Windows defrag on my Win95, I am thrilled Diskeeper 7 on XP! Since its relatively new and has 83% free space, it only takes seconds to run DK. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cluttermagnet Posted October 31, 2003 Author Share Posted October 31, 2003 Thanks, guys, for all the interesting comments. Please keep them coming if you happen to think of more on the subject. Well, I'm going to just stick with the 'Lite' version of DK for now and run it for a while. Norton Speed Disk is not too shabby, as epp_b pointed out, and is sure a lot better than the generic Windows defrag. If DK proves to be a lot faster than Speed Disk, that would probably make it a keeper over time. Too early to say, but I see that it sure comes highly recommended, so I will give it a lengthy audition. BTW simple manual defragging is just fine for me. I am pretty good about maintenance and have never felt like I was missing much not to have a bunch of scheduled tasks. I really do prefer to do stuff manually. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichNRockville Posted October 31, 2003 Share Posted October 31, 2003 I have used a few DeFraggers and a long time ago, I tried a program called VOPT, theyhave different flavors for use. from win98 thru xp. they have an eval version and areavailable at http://www.goldenbow.com/ I still use it about once a week. The XP version has a lot of extra utility included that I use.Just another $0.02 worth but your mileage may vary. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agent007 Posted November 1, 2003 Share Posted November 1, 2003 I have used a few DeFraggers and a long time ago, I tried a program called VOPT, theyhave different flavors for use. from win98 thru xp. they have an eval version and areavailable at http://www.goldenbow.com/Â I still use it about once a week. The XP version has a lot of extra utility included that I use.Just another $0.02 worth but your mileage may vary.hi,IS VOPT as fast as Diskkeeper? thanks Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichNRockville Posted November 1, 2003 Share Posted November 1, 2003 IS VOPT as fast as Diskkeeper?I have not tried diskkeeper so can not answer that. I set Vopt torun and it does it's thing, I do like to watch the gblinking little squares move around.It is noticebly faster than defrag. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b2cm Posted November 1, 2003 Share Posted November 1, 2003 I use Ontrack's JetDefrag. I never had problems with it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zlim Posted November 1, 2003 Share Posted November 1, 2003 On my 2K computer Vopt is faster than Diskkeeper Lite (I haven't tried the other versions). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
henderrob Posted November 2, 2003 Share Posted November 2, 2003 I use Diskeeper 8 Home in the set and forget. I find it quicker and less noticeable. It helps my old 5400rpm harddrive perform well. With the 'Set and forget' it defrags when I'm not using the computer or when I not using the harddrive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marsden11 Posted November 2, 2003 Share Posted November 2, 2003 Comparing anyones defragment program to a trial program is pointless. If you are going to make resonable comparisions then compare full product to full product.The main reason I use Diskeeper 8 (client and server), is so I can set it to whatever frequency I want it to run at (times per day) and then forget it. I can't think of a better way to run a utility than to set it up to run itself and then forget about it.With it running every day in the background, it only takes seconds per volume to run. I know that all my volumes are as optimized as they can get. I can optimize Directories...I can defrag the PageFile...I can defrag the MFT...I can't do those last three items in the Lite version nor can I set it up with "Set it and Forget It." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ibe98765 Posted November 2, 2003 Share Posted November 2, 2003 I can optimize Directories...I can defrag the PageFile...I can defrag the MFT...I can't do those last three items in the Lite version nor can I set it up with "Set it and Forget It."A point to keep in mind - areas that can be defragged online vs offline (having to reboot) vary by OS and file system choice. An excerpt below from the Perfect Disk help file: Online vs. Offline File TypesCertain files cannot be defragmented online due to operating system constraints. The constraints vary by operating system (Windows 2003, Windows XP and Windows 2000) and by file system format (FAT/FAT32 or NTFS). The three types of files which may need to be defragmented offline are:Pagefile - This is your virtual memory file (Pagefile.sys). This file is exclusively locked by the operating system and can only be placed by a boot time defragmentation pass. System Files - These are operating system files such as the Master File Table, the hibernate file and other metadata files. Depending on the operating and file systems some of these files can be defragmented online and some offline. See the below chart. Directories - On NTFS formatted drives directories are treated as online files. On FAT/FAT32 formatted drives directories are treated as offline files. Windows 2000..........FAT or FAT32.......................NTFSPage file.....................OFFLINE.................................OFFLINESystem Files...............OFFLINE.................................OFFLINE.................................Hibernate file..........................Master File Table, Hibernate and other metadata files.Directories.................OFFLINE.................................ONLINEData Files...................ONLINE..................................ONLINE------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Windows 2003/XP.....FAT or FAT32.................NTFSPage file......................OFFLINE...........................OFFLINESystem Files................OFFLINE (Hibernate file).....OFFLINE (Hibernate file)..................................ONLINE (MFT)...................ONLINE & OFFLINE (other metadata files)Directories...................OFFLINE...........................ONLINEData Files....................ONLINE............................ONLINE Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agent007 Posted November 2, 2003 Share Posted November 2, 2003 On my 2K computer Vopt is faster than Diskkeeper Lite (I haven't tried the other versions).On my system too, VoptXP was faster than Diskkeeper lite...Also, VoptXP has this great feature wherein one can specify not to move files of a certain size..I've given a value of 10MB. This way, only the smaller system files get to be defragged and saves time too..Quite a neat feature I think.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prelude76 Posted November 3, 2003 Share Posted November 3, 2003 please, no more "set it and forget it" references, ok? i'm not impressed with diskeeper using that famous cheezy line. you know, that Roasterie infomercial? "you put the turkey in here, and then.... what?" "[Audience yells] You SET IT and FORGET IT!" "Right! and you can also put the bacon strips in here and ...." "[Audience:] SET IT and FORGET IT!" "GREAT!!"(yes, i watch too much late nite tv) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theHammer Posted November 3, 2003 Share Posted November 3, 2003 What am I missing using the defrag utility that comes with Windows - currently running XP-Home, Fat 32 on all partitions. I run via a batch file which in turn runs a chkdsk on each and then defrags each at 2:00 am once a week. Obviously I could care less how long it takes.Ed Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marsden11 Posted November 3, 2003 Share Posted November 3, 2003 You can't optimize Directories...You can't defrag the PageFile...You can't defrag the MFT... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gus K Posted November 4, 2003 Share Posted November 4, 2003 You can't defrag the PageFile...I've never seen mine get fragmented.I use XP's defragger about once a month (more than enough). I tried Diskeeper, it would defrag quickly. But in the course of just using my computer (no installs, deletions etc.) XP makes subtle file adjustments based on this usage. At the end of the day Diskeeper wants to defrag again, basically undoing XP's optimizations. Am I missing something here? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
havnblast Posted November 4, 2003 Share Posted November 4, 2003 I vote Diskkeepper - always thought it was a good program Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agent007 Posted November 4, 2003 Share Posted November 4, 2003 XP makes subtle file adjustments based on this usage. At the end of the day Diskeeper wants to defrag again, basically undoing XP's optimizations. Am I missing something here?hi,So, are u saying that XP's defrag tool would actually be the most optimum one?thanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gus K Posted November 5, 2003 Share Posted November 5, 2003 So, are u saying that XP's defrag tool would actually be the most optimum one?I kinda am. The whole defrag thing is so overblown these days. With NTFS's larger clusters and today's faster drives, and XP's constant optimizations, unless your drive is very fragmented (major deletions/uninstalls) you rarely have to defrag as often as the third party defrag people would have you believe. Many experts including Steve Gibson (who certainly seems to understand hard drives) don't believe in the ongoing defrag every time you turn around thing.Although XP's defrag is slow, it does the job (completely defrags my hard drive). And if you followed it with one of the so-called better defraggers there would no measureable performance difference. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theHammer Posted November 5, 2003 Share Posted November 5, 2003 Yet Marsden11 states: You can't optimize Directories... You can't defrag the PageFile... You can't defrag the MFT...I'll stick my neck out and assume that optimizing Directories refers stashing all the content and subdirectories of a directory near (under) the directory and is not relative to the files. As for the PageFile I suspect it is badly defragmenter all the time but certainly not spread all over the hard drive.Ed Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.