Diskeeper 7.0 Home Edition

[lorlabnew]

I wonder whether Diskeeper 7.0 Home Edition download version is worth the $29 ?

I'd be using it with Win2k and WinXP. I have nothing against Windows built-in defrag utility, except that it always seems to leave some files fragmented, and also its a bit slow (particularly if the drive is heavily used and/or not defragmented often). I don't need automated defragmenting really.

I tried some Lite Diskkeeper in the past, and I hated their "buy full version" reminders, but remember it worked fast.

thx for suggestion
dave

 

[ginfest]

I f you don't need the extra features, like automated defrag, the XP built-in defrag is fine.
I have 3 NTFS partitions and defrag once a week and it only takes minutes to do the job. I do have 1 Fat32 partition and that does take a little longer, but not by much.

Mike G

 

[lorlabnew]

thx ginfest,

I also think that while not perfect, the Windows defragmenter is rather sufficient....

dave

 

[Anubis]

i use diskeeper 7 on my XP machine. i use it because i can set it in that "always defrrag" mode. keeps my drive form getting cluttered. i move so much stuff on and off and around my comp i couldent work without it

 

[Kinesis]

I too use DiskKeeper 7.0 , but have had issues (see MyPost ), but I find it far superior to the built in Defragmenter in XP. Also, consider the same company makes the "lite" version that comes with Window XP (a.k.a Defragmenter).

I think it is work the few bucks...but it depends on how much file movements you conduct in your system.