Something better than Win2k Defrag

Shmorq

Diamond Member
Aug 10, 2000
3,431
1
0
The full diskeeper version is pretty good. Speeddisk included with Norton Utilities (or System Works ?) is also a very nice one.
 

RC5Bri

Senior member
Dec 24, 2000
378
0
0
I would agree that the full version of Diskeeper is the best. It is a small program, and not bloated like other software suites.
 

Sugadaddy

Banned
May 12, 2000
6,495
0
0
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...
 

John

Moderator Emeritus<br>Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
33,944
1
0
The only bad thing is that it's relatively expensive.
 

Razorbacks

Member
Oct 23, 2000
148
0
0
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.
 

Jhereg

Senior member
Jan 23, 2000
260
0
0


<< 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....
 

MichaelD

Lifer
Jan 16, 2001
31,529
3
76
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.
 

Shudder

Platinum Member
May 5, 2000
2,256
0
0
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.