• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Something better than Win2k Defrag

The full diskeeper version is pretty good. Speeddisk included with Norton Utilities (or System Works ?) is also a very nice one.
 
I would agree that the full version of Diskeeper is the best. It is a small program, and not bloated like other software suites.
 
Speed Disk comes with Norton Utilities, which is included in Norton Systemworks.

But I never use it, I thought you didn't need to defrag NTFS...
 
Definately a vote for Diskeeper full version. The "set it and forget it" feature keeps my systems nice and tidy every week without intervention.
Excellent utility that is relatively small and just works--no bloat.
 


<< Speed Disk comes with Norton Utilities, which is included in Norton Systemworks.

But I never use it, I thought you didn't need to defrag NTFS... >>



Nice Microsoft myth.. never could figure out why they stated that....
also I have heard some horror stories concerning Win2K and Norton Speed Disk....
 
I use Norton Speeddisk w/W2K and it works fine. It does give you a warning that Speeddisk isn't certified to work with NT5 (I assume "NT5" is W2K...) but I just click "Continue" and it does it's thing just fine.
 
I use O&O's defragmenter. I like it.. it's about the same as Diskkeeper though, so whichever you can get, go for it. OO has a trial versionf or 30 days so ther'es no harm in giving it a shot.

I'd stay away from norton's speeddisk. Just because norton puts files where it thinks it'll be faster, doesn't mean that's where Windows thinks they should go. You'll get thrashing more than you could ever want when windows reads a file and when it writes it it has to go to a completely different part of the disk because well.. that's what it wants to do. Windows doesn't know which is frequently accessed, which isn't, written to, not written to. Norton makes assumptions.

I always thought this, and then I read the not even that biased publication by the author of diskkeeper. He makes a very good argument why optimization is pretty pointless, and it makes too much sense to write it off as biased propaganda.

Anyway.. go with diskkeeper or OO

edited: Plus I thought Speeddisk defragged the MFT while the OS was up and running, which is a no-no.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top