SOMETHING BETTER THAN WIN DEFRAG

  ZEROTOLERANCE 23:09 06 Jun 04
Locked

i am looking for a defrag utility and was going to download diskeeper lite , but then i noticed it only for windows upto win2000, can anyone reccomend a similar utility for xp?

thanx
ZT

  VoG II 23:15 06 Jun 04

click here it works with XP.

  ZEROTOLERANCE 23:26 06 Jun 04

ok i'll give iy a go

  dagwoood 23:33 06 Jun 04

I've been using Diskeeper Lite for over 2 months now, it's never caused any problems and it's a lot faster than the defrag utility that comes with XP(my o/s is XP Pro).

dagwoood.

  mesmd 00:12 07 Jun 04

I still use the demo of disklitever 7.0 (which the company can't inactivate for some unknown reason!) and it works great and fast for my 80gb hard drive. I had used other demos of disklite but they were inactivated after 15-30 days, as the company wanted me to buy a registered version. In any event, Disklite is ok to use and works well on win xp.
Miles

  Stuartli 09:54 07 Jun 04

XP's defrag (I use XP Pro) works perfectly satisfactorily and takes about 10-15 minutes in operation om my system.

Fastest isn't always the best route - accurate and thorough is more important.

  AcidBurn7uk 14:55 07 Jun 04

10-15 mins, how big is your hard-drive!? I have an 80gb and that take anywhere between 3-5 hours, depending on how fragmented my drive is. But even on my old 40 it took a good few hours!

  dagwoood 15:12 07 Jun 04

I agree that fastest isn't always the best, but I think you'll find that the defrag utility on Windows XP was provided by Executive Software(the people who make Diskeeper)and it's a more basic version of Diskeeper.

dagwoood.

  Stuartli 15:27 07 Jun 04

It's a 60GB WD600JB.

In fact although I defrag about once a month I'm usually informed that defragmentation is only about five or six per cent and it's not really necessary...:-)

  AcidBurn7uk 18:08 07 Jun 04

ah right, I was beginning to think that maybe I was missing a speed option or something. I have a bad habit of allowing my hard drive to become badly fragmented which would probably accound for why it always takes so long. Maybe if I kept on top of it, it would also take a short time.

Also the first thing that struck me when I started disk-keeper was the similarity between it and XP's defrag utilitie.

  jimv7 19:16 07 Jun 04

Stuartli, might interest you, but xp defrag does not do a full job, it does not do the page file, where exec. diskeeper does.

This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.

Nintendo Switch review: Hands-on with the intuitive modular console and its disappointing games…

1995-2015: How technology has changed the world in 20 years

This abstract video touches on division in our technologic world

Best alternatives to iTunes for Mac | Best music players for macOS: Free your music from the…