| Forum Home | ||||
| Press F1 | ||||
| Thread ID: 52851 | 2004-12-31 23:50:00 | Norton DiskOptimisation v XP Defrag | allblack (6574) | Press F1 |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 309362 | 2004-12-31 23:50:00 | Afternoon all. Anyone have any views on what's best - Norton SystemWorks (2003 Pro) Disk Optimisation or MS XP Defragger? Is one better than the other, and if so how/why? Is anything to be gained by using both??? I've searched for previous messages, but not much there, though some wag did make the comment they thought DiskOptimisation was the SAME as XP Defragger but with a sexier interface! Cheers Tim |
allblack (6574) | ||
| 309363 | 2005-01-01 00:22:00 | I can't say much for either, except to summise that I have not seen any evidence of Windows XP defragger consolidating free space. XP's defragger is supposed to check for errors before it starts, but I have scanned my hard disks with older programs and found errors after it had finished, and this was after I had run a chkdsk. Needless to say, I don't have much faith in XP's defragger, except to say it does defragment files. An example - before repartitioning my hard drive with Partition Magic 8.01, I defragged it, then selected a partition boundary well beyond the supposed end of used space, and PM8 still had to move files so the operation could be completed, indicating the free space on my hard disk was not consolidated. |
m_pav (6721) | ||
| 309364 | 2005-01-01 02:20:00 | the early 95-me defrag was based on the early nortons defrag. the XP one (afaik) was based on an early ver of diskeeper?, however both companies have vastly improved on them while MS hasn't. i prefer nortons due to being able to shift the location of the swap file, however with my recent troubles with nortons software it may get thrown in the bin ! |
tweak'e (69) | ||
| 1 | |||||