This new version detects traditional laptop's HD as SSD dics, that's wrong.
I've tested it with different laptops brand, under Vista and Win7.
same here: v2.07.346 (64-bit) / Windows 7 detects a WD internal hard disk as an SSD.
Details: Western Digital WD 10EALS-00Z8A0 Sata/300
Does Speccy say SSD also??
Richard S.
Thanks for the info. We'll have a look at this.
Dell T3400 (Intel integrated SATA RAID controller)
two ST3160815AS in RAID 0 array is detected as SSD
Acer Aspire 5732Z running Windows 7 64-bit, WDC WD2500BEVT-22A23T0 also being detected as SSD
I have version 2.06.328 and have not downloaded this new version 2.07.346 because of what I have read in this thread. Can you give a novice like me a simple explanation of what would happen if you had a traditional HD and ran the new version and it defraged it as a SSD? Would it cause damage? Sould I wait till this is resolved till I download the new version since I have a traditional HD ( I do not know the model ) ? Or simple what does the amount to if ran on a traditional HD? Thanks, I am new here. Have used CCleaner for years and now trying out Defraggler.
Thanks, we're working on this
I have version 2.06.328 and have not downloaded this new version 2.07.346 because of what I have read in this thread. Can you give a novice like me a simple explanation of what would happen if you had a traditional HD and ran the new version and it defraged it as a SSD? Would it cause damage? Sould I wait till this is resolved till I download the new version since I have a traditional HD ( I do not know the model ) ? Or simple what does the amount to if ran on a traditional HD? Thanks, I am new here. Have used CCleaner for years and now trying out Defraggler.
I think there is no difference in the process for defragmenting a drive, be it HD or SSD. Some people say defragmenting SSD, usb pendrives and such USB memory devices can lead to a shortened lifespam on those devices because they just withstand a certain number of write operations before kicking the bucket. That's why defragmenting those devices is not recommended.
Same problem here, Speccy sees as normal.
SD
Hitachi HTS547550A9E384
Manufacturer Hitachi
Product Family Travelstar
Series Prefix Standard
Speed, Expressed in Revolutions Per Minute (rpm) 5400
Model Capacity For This Specific Drive 750GB
Heads 16
Cylinders 16383
SATA type SATA-II 3.0Gb/s
Device type Fixed
ATA Standard ATA8-ACS
48-bit LBA Supported
Serial Number J2150050G0Y6ZC
Interface SATA
Capacity 488GB
Real size 500,107,862,016 bytes
RAID Type None
Suffering the same problem with v2.07.346 (64-bit) oh every drive and partition.
Windows 7 Enterperise 64-bit
OS version: 6.1.7601
Mobo: ASRock Z68 Pro3-M
BIOS: P1.40
RAID Chipset: Intel Rapid Storage
Driver: v10.6.0.1002
ROM: v10.5.0.1034
HDD 0: (2) Seagate ST310005N1A1AS in RAID 1
Firmware: CC49
HDD 1: (1) Seagate ST320005N4A
Firmware: CC35
I'm adding my computer to this list of wrong SSD detects.
I run XP 64 on a system I built myself, AMD Phenom II with 8 GB of RAM and about 5 TB of hard drive storage. Two external 3 TB hard drives are detected normally.
Defraggler misidentifies 4 internal drives, perfectly normal Seagate 500 GB each, as SSDs. It looks pretty silly, as these are about as standard/plain-Jane as you can get; nothing at all exotic about them.
The idea that a defragger wouldn't be able to properly distinguish the very drives it's defragging is unnerving. I used to have much more confidence in Defraggler, but I'm not staying with this version or ANY version. The defragging process itself would be unrelated to the drive ID, but something here is very wrong. If the algorithms established as acceptable don't know what kind of drive is being defragged, how can I assume the algorithms for carrying out intricate work on these same drives will be okay?
It is kind of creepy, because this is not a Beta version, and it's behaving like an Alpha. Someone in Piriform has been way, way overconfident. He's damaging Piriform's reputation.
No, no thanks to using Defraggler on my system any more. These drives and their content are very important to me. I'm continuing with CCleaner for the time being, but I'm watching it carefully. I notice it is now split into a $$$ version and a free version. I do hope Piriform hasn't gone the way of Aljazeera.
Sorry; it's a shame, really. Thanks very much anyway.
same there
WIndows 7 64bit Home Premium
Degraggler 2.07
HDD ST9750420AS, 750GB, 100MB r/w
Chipset: Intel Mobile Chipset HM57
DELL Inspiron N5010
Thank you for fixing this asap
I notice it is now split into a $$$ version and a free version.
Defraggler is FREE. Read the download page carefully. The paid version is buying priority tech support only - $24.95 priority support for home users, $39.95 priority support for business users. You would be paying for the support, not the product.
I got the same problem on my asus eeepc 1005pe netbook.
- Windows 7 sp1 ultimate
- hd specs:
Brand: Seagate
Model Number: ST9250315AS
Family: MOMENTUS 5400.6 FAMILY
Size: 250GB
Also showing as SSD..
WDC WD1001FALS-00E8B0
Manufacturer Western Digital
Form Factor TB/3.5-inch (new format)
Business Unit/Brand Desktop/WD Caviar®
RPM/Buffer Size or Attribute 7200 RPM with 32 MB cache
Interface/Connector SATA 3 Gb/s with 22-pin SATA connector/SATA 1.5 Gb/s with 22-pin SATA connector (Mobile)
Heads 16
Cylinders 16383
SATA type SATA-II 3.0Gb/s
Device type Fixed
ATA Standard ATA8-ACS
48-bit LBA Supported
Serial Number WD-WMATV1972456
Interface SATA
Capacity 977GB
Real size 1,000,204,886,016 bytes
RAID Type None
This one is right.
M4-CT128M4SSD2
Manufacturer Unknown manufacturer
Heads 16
Cylinders 16383
SATA type SATA-II 3.0Gb/s
Device type Fixed
ATA Standard ATA8-ACS
48-bit LBA Supported
Serial Number 0000000011320316130C
Interface SATA-SSD
Capacity 125GB
Real size 128,035,676,160 bytes
RAID Type None
Still have the same issue, disc ST9750420AS 750GB 100MB r/w. Could you fix this issue asap? Or is there any workaround?
A workaround? As nobody has identified any difference between the way Defraggler treats HD's and SSD's you could consider ignoring it.
I do wonder why you guys put in a new feature that does not work.