martinsmithson Posted August 21, 2008 Share Posted August 21, 2008 Anyone have any perspective (or reason) why Diskeeper is (apparently) LIGHTENING FAST compared to every other defragmeter, including Defraggler? In addition to Defraggler, I use a FREE version of Diskeeper, specfically Diskeeper Lite 9 version 9.0.528.0 from 2005. Therfore, I would appreciate those who refrain from making moot or sarcastic comments regarding the issue of "FREE" software versus all other defragmenting software. I should also mention that when I defrag, the following batch file commands are executed to disable antivirus, firewall and other related software... sc stop AntiVirService sc config AntiVirService start= disabled sc stop AntiVirScheduler sc config AntiVirScheduler start= disabled sc stop BITS sc config BITS start= disabled sc stop wuauserv sc config wuauserv start= disabled sc stop SharedAccess sc config SharedAccess start= disabled sc stop wscsvc sc config wscsvc start= disabled ...as a result, slower defragmenters, like Defraggler, are NOT handicapped by issues of antivirus, firewall or related software. Other than its ability to defrag a single file (versus the whole drive), performance-wise, thus far, I find only one issue why I prefer Defraggler over Diskeeper Lite 9. Thanks, Martin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davey Posted August 21, 2008 Share Posted August 21, 2008 Anyone have any perspective (or reason) why Diskeeper is (apparently) LIGHTENING FAST compared to every other defragmeter, including Defraggler? In addition to Defraggler, I use a FREE version of Diskeeper, specfically Diskeeper Lite 9 version 9.0.528.0 from 2005. Therfore, I would appreciate those who refrain from making moot or sarcastic comments regarding the issue of "FREE" software versus all other defragmenting software. Other than its ability to defrag a single file (versus the whole drive), performance-wise, thus far, I find only one issue why I prefer Defraggler over Diskeeper Lite 9. Thanks, Martin Hi Marty, Mainly,Different strokes for different folks. No personal experience with Diskeeper 9. The speed that impresses me most is how quickly Defraggler has matured in just one year. Look up member "thm" posts and you will find some very informative threads about Defraggler versus other defrag products. Go back several months to get all the data. There are other users threads also but "thm" search on member name will lead you to most of them. Nothing beats info from people who have used many products. Good hearing from you, davey P.S. You can also follow the Great Defrag Shootout starting here. This will show the many comparisons. http://donnedwards.openaccess.co.za/search/label/Thumbs%20Up Sunday, April 27, 2008 Another Look at Defraggler Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
martinsmithson Posted August 21, 2008 Author Share Posted August 21, 2008 Hi Marty,Mainly,Different strokes for different folks. No personal experience with Diskeeper 9. The speed that impresses me most is how quickly Defraggler has matured in just one year. Look up member "thm" posts and you will find some very informative threads about Defraggler versus other defrag products. Go back several months to get all the data. There are other users threads also but "thm" search on member name will lead you to most of them. Nothing beats info from people who have used many products. Good hearing from you, davey Thanks for your reply, davey. With due respect... I did express my interest that everyone refrain from making "moot" comments, and while your comments are interesting, I find that they have no intrinsic value (unless your goal is to market Defraggler) regarding my post. Thanks again, Martin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anonymous_user Posted August 21, 2008 Share Posted August 21, 2008 While I too noticed Diskeeper to be fast, it doesnt seem to do a thorough job compared to other defraggers like PerfectDisk. Also Diskeeper may not be aggressive when consolidating free space. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Andavari Posted August 21, 2008 Moderators Share Posted August 21, 2008 ...as a result, slower defragmenters, like Defraggler, are NOT handicapped by issues of antivirus, firewall or related software. To this day if I want to do a full system defrag (you know the slow type) I disable the antivirus real-time protection as it can easily add another 25%-50% to the total defrag time. When doing a files only defrag with Defraggler I don't find it necessary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
martinsmithson Posted August 21, 2008 Author Share Posted August 21, 2008 While I too noticed Diskeeper to be fast, it doesnt seem to do a thorough job compared to other defraggers like PerfectDisk. Also Diskeeper may not be aggressive when consolidating free space. I am in complete agreement with your perspective on Diskeeper regarding its ability to consolidate free space, anonymous_user. Diskeeper fails miserably with respect to free space, leaving far too much space between defragmented files. As a result, future files stored are often initially fragmented. I find this issue a HUGE problem when recording over-the-air HDTV broadcasts, where files often exceed 5 GB. Thanks for your post. Regards, Martin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
martinsmithson Posted August 21, 2008 Author Share Posted August 21, 2008 To this day if I want to do a full system defrag (you know the slow type) I disable the antivirus real-time protection as it can easily add another 25%-50% to the total defrag time. When doing a files only defrag with Defraggler I don't find it necessary. As do I, Andavari. Thanks for your post. Regards, Martin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now