37 total posts
(Page 1 of 2)
If free is paramount then use what the OS provides. There are a few that wanted absolute control over defragmenting such as optimizing big or small files at front or rear of drive or by placing more accessed filess at rear or front of the drive. But then again how could a defragmenter quess what would be best for you. For Windows, http://www.theeldergeek.com/disk_defragmenter_utility.htm writes:
"For the majority of users, the Disk Defragmenter Utility included with XP is sufficient to keep the hard drives in relatively good condition, but it's actually what is known as a Lite or slightly crippled version of Diskeeper, a product made by Executive Software."
You're right, I just thought there is better disk defragmenter than the original
I use a free version of Diskeeper Lite and have for about one year. I am very satisfied with the free version though most I see purchase the full version. It cut my defrag time by about 80 percent over the windows defrag and if done regularly will run in less than 3 minutes on a 200 gig hd.
I also try it, it's usefull software for begginer people.
Peace...Hi & Hello 2 every one reading this Message...
Thank you Dear Diskeeper Lite or Heavey Software.
And Thank you to all people who are using it.
It's very usefull Software for all kind of people and specially for
Bigginer. The Best of the Best Software i have been use it. All the Best in the future & to the more devolpment in the future.
E-Mail : email@example.com
Another question about defrag utilities...
I have an MP3 player (Sansa e280)... 8GB flash... is it wise/possible to defrag flash storage? I deleted lots of files yesterday... I'd like to try it...
Re: defragging flash memory
That doesn't make sense. Defragging has to do with speeding up file access by minimizing the movements of the read head of the hard disk. But a flash drive doesn't have such. It's all electronics, no mechanics.
Defragging - The Rest of the Story
Actually, defragging has more to do than just with head movement (i.e. hard drives). With hard drives it also has to do with file placement, file order, and, of course, the actual reintegration of each individual file. So defragging any "fragmented" medium, including a flash drive, would increase its performance based on how a given operating system looks for requested files.
Be sure whatever you do, or whatever the medium to be defragmented, you run the equivalent of chkdsk /f function before you defrag. This will clear up any file allocation problems before you try the other.
A good run of thumb, to make sure you defrag as many ?system? files as possible is to run defrag for the first time in ?safe mode?; make sure your networking is off (to protect your system from outside sources) and that your anti virus is not running. This will ensure the maximum number of critical files is defragmented along with your everyday data files.
Concerning defragging your flash drive?there is a performance improvement (scientifically) due to the process, regardless of having heads or not. But, due to the current construction of a flash drive, when you ?write? to the drive, it tends to wear out a flash drive much more quickly than not. ?Reading? a flash drive doesn?t hurt it, but current tech is such (though it improves daily) that you want to ?write? as little as possible. There are "good" flash drives and "bad" flash drive conditioned on how they utilize their own FAT file, or rather how they write to it.
Having said this, it might be smart to create what you want to place on your flash drive in a directory of your hard drive first; organize it the way you want?defrag it there. Then write it to your flash drive. After that, if you keep your defrag down to once a month (for your flash drive), you should be fine.
Here is a good link to a relevant article: http://donnedwards.openaccess.co.za/2008/01/flash-drive-defrag-warning.html.
Wikipedia also has a good list of defragmentation software/freeware (though not inclusive):
Used my advanced defrag
Diskeeper Lite this can be my another collection for free stuff. At the moment I'm using Advanced defrag to defrag my computer. Instead it can help defrag my registry too. You can try it. Thanks
I'm using MyDefragng
So far so good, it optimizes in addition to defragments. Applications are usually more responsive after optimization. Boot time is also shorter.
AusLogics Disk Defragmenter
I like this one over the OS defragmenter. Its faster, and dafrags my second drive, which hangs with the original defragmenter. It may not do as thorough a job, however probably enough for XP.
AusLogics works quite well
I downloaded the AusLogics Defrag program just to give it a try. I've used it ever since.
It's certainly is far faster than anything else I've ever used. And free. Took care of 200 gigs in about 10 minutes (after not defragging for about a month).
Ashampoo Magical Defrag.... (but not free)
Hi. I've been using Ashampoo Magical Defrag for about 6 months, and while it's not free it's very inexpensive, works in the background, takes up few resources, and has, from day one, worked great. I believe there is a trial version, so you can try it out if you'd like.
iobit has just launched a free beta of their defrag utility. i have been using it for a couple of weeks and works fine. it will run in background as a "smart" utility unless you turn it off otherwise seeme just as effective as diskeepeer
reply to: Best Free Disk Defragmenter
The best I've found so far is...
DirMS-S which is available here: http://www.dirms.com/home/docs/dirms1.asp
It defrags your drives even if you have very little space left. It has a simple GUI with only three buttons; Defragment(does what it says on the tin), compact (defrags and moves files to one "end" of the drive leaving most of the free space at the other) and stop. It will also defrag files windows defrag considers too big. FYI: I found auslogics defrag didn't work as well as windows defrag.
Diskeeper is my preference
Used a registered version for a few years now and my other PC has just had Vista installed on it and their Vista version goes very quickly
Diskeeper for me too
I just purchased the Pro 2007 version. I simply love the proactive background defrag over the weekly or monthly scheduled tasks coz my HDD gets fragged real real fast. Noticed that none of the simultaneous operations which run seem to get affected. In my opinion, a great purchase.
What does "Proactive Background" defrag mean?
What does this mean? Does the software determine when you need to defrag as opposed to waiting for the next manual or scheduled defrag? I'm in the market for a better than Windows XP Pro defrag, something that I don't have to think about. I've never been clear on how often one should defrag anyway.
Proactive defragmentation is where the defragger runs in the background monitoring the fragmentation levels and performs 'small' defragmentation cycles as deemed necessary to prevent fragmentation from increasing. While it does indeed keep fragmentation levels down, some have argued it causes more harm than good, defragmenting after and ever-so-slight change, potentially slowing down the computer and adding wear and tear to the hard drive.
Personally, I recommend launching your defragmentation utility once a week to once a month, depending on your usage, and choosing the Analyze option. Like with medication, you don't want too much or too little, so only defragment if it is recommended by the defragger.
Hope this helps,
No such thing
In my experience, there is no really good free windows defrag utilities. I have tried perfectdisk (not freeware), DirMS (free, but limited functionality) etc and by far, the best of the lot that actually works as advertised has been Diskeeper.
Diskeeper 2007 runs totally unobtrusively in my system (A64/3500+, 1 GB RAM, 160GB HDD) and I actually get to use the PC while it runs silently but effectively in the background hardly using up system resources. The Pro version can also defrag multiple drives simultaneously, with scheduling functionality.
I usually champion freeware utilities, but when it comes to defrag, I'd strongly recommend diskeeper. Freeware defraggers are nice in theory, but they have never worked for me.
O&O Defrag Free
That's the one I've been using, it's not too bad, it is old and meant for Windows 2000 but I've been running it problem free in XP for a while. However, I have heard many good things about Diskeeper and if the defragger in XP is simply a lite version of it, I may actually uninstall O&O and try XP. To be honest, I've never tried the XP one, I've just figured that, given Micro$oft's track record with defraggers, I would have to find a free one to replace the built in one. Thanks for the tip!
Diskeeper 2007 Professional Edition
Earlier this year; i took this product for a 30 day trial! To my surprise, this product couldn't manage the 160GB Hard Drive in my MSI 7207G with 1GB of ram. It's my opinion that this product is a piece of Bull Manure. I now use The Defrag_Team! It's comprised of The Power Defragmentor GUI from Xcessive software (get it from majorgeeks.com) & Contig 1.54 from MSDN TECH NET! AFTER 3 WEEKS DISKEEPER STILL COULDN'T HANDLE THIS HARDDRIVE. GOOGLE THE DEFRAG_TEAM YOU MIGHT JUST LIKE IT EVEN THOUGH IT'S A TOTALLY MANUAL OPERATION (everything must be done in the power mode) IT CAN BE RUN IN MULTIPLE INSTANCES! THE WINDOWS DEFRAGGER CAN'T DO THAT, IT CAN DEFRAG FILES & FOLDERS, THUMB DRIVES, HARD DRIVES!!
What is wrong with the one already in XP?
I've been using it for the last few years and it seems fine to me, or an I missing something? We have numerous construction clients and they all use it for their business computers and some of them are running some pretty hefty software including sql server!
Message was edited by: admin to remove sig
The Windows defragmenter is basically a spinoff of the Diskeeper defragmenter, a result of a partnership back in the '90s. Diskeeper has been advanced over the years while Windows defragmenter has more or less been overlooked. Thus, compared to some of the other utilities on the market it is slow and inefficient, with its competitors completing potentially over an hour earlier and resulting in lower fragmentation levels after the scan. It's still a valid option, but some want 'something more.'
P.S. Please don't include your company's website in your signature...it falls under the advertising section of the forum policies.
You are absolutely right.
John, you are right about the windows defragger. I just googled and it appears that both the XP as well as Vista defraggers are highly watered down versions licensed from diskeeper.
Again, agree with you that MS has done **absolutely nothing** for all these years, while diskeeper has forged ahead with its own defragmentation solutions. The lack of options, and the lack of performance of the windows defragger is quite astonishing, considering it's part of the most widely used operating system on the planet. Even more ironic when you compare that to the features and improvements diskeeper has incorporated into *their* successive releases over the years. Lol I have no hope of MS doing anything more on that front, so forget about any sudden improvement updates to the windows defragger. That said,I am extremely satisfied with the performance of my Diskeeper installation, so I am in an okay situation as far as defragging is concerned.
What is the difference between the 2 free diskeepers...
Hi John,I been reading this post about defragers and decided to check into diskeeper.I found here http://www.freedownloadscenter.com/Best/diskeeper-light.html 2 free versions. Diskeeper Lite 3.0 and Diskeeper 7.0 set it and forget it!
Sounds like the "Ronco Rotiserrie Grill",Ha Ha.Has anyone ever tried the 7.0? Seems like you said you been using the 3.0 lite version.Just wondering what your thoughts were.
Bad site, good program...
First, I would avoid that download site at all costs...they are known for downloads packaged with malware, spamming, using browser exploits, and more. I'd stick to download.com, softpedia.com, and snapfiles.com, all of which are trustworthy.
As to Diskeeper itself, the Lite version is free and is actually what the Windows defragmenter is based on. The full version (7.0 is an old edition) comes in demo form (they list it as freeware but it's not) and offers all of the 'advanced features,' including less strain on system resources, faster completion, real-time fragmentation monitoring, automatic defragmentation, customer support, etc. Both are good, but the paid version is not necessary.
Hope this helps,
Thanks for timely advice!
I almost downloaded it (7.0) from there but I thought I would check back in to see if you responded.I'm gonna go for the 3.0 diskeeper.
What about major geeks.com are they OK as far as all the things you listed about the site I linked.
I always neglect to mention them as one of the trusted sites despite using majorgeeks.com on a regular basis and linking them them myself.
Well they only have 7.0
It has all the features but they are not working.Like you said "demo"
I can not find the lite 3.0 except for that bad site.The main place for diskeeper does not offer the free version.I have not checked the other places you mentioned.Do you know where to get the free one (3.0)?
Back to PC Applications Forum
(Page 1 of 2)