| Forum Home | ||||
| Press F1 | ||||
| Thread ID: 16183 | 2002-03-01 00:31:00 | Who's telling the truth? | Guest (0) | Press F1 |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 37470 | 2002-03-01 00:31:00 | Hi all, Ive got Norton Utitlites 2002, Disk Keeper 7.0 and of course the windows disk defragmenter that comes with Win2000 pro. My question is based on disk defragmenting. You see, as stated having the above utensils, Im having abit trouble trying to find out which is the best suited and why? Ive used all of them and trying to compare the results is somewhat confusing. The thing is when Im using Norton's Speed disk and after defragmenting, heres me thinking that my disk is correctly utilized. So just to be definitely sure,I try the disk defrag utility from Win2000pro, and thus the results show that it is Highly recommended to defrag my hard disk.And the results again show differently vice versa using the other utensils. So why are some utilities displaying that your disk is defraged while others suggest that it isnt? |
Guest (0) | ||
| 37471 | 2002-03-01 00:36:00 | Hi Michael, different defrag utilities work differently. One will sort the data out one way, and another will sort it out another way. For example, system files may be put at the start of the disk as opposed to the end of the disk. You should stick to one defrag utility, there will be no benefit in running multiple defrag utilities. JM |
Guest (0) | ||
| 37472 | 2002-03-01 04:54:00 | The other minor point to bear in mind is: As long as you defrag your disk occasionally, it does not matter which utility you use. The amount of time you will save by using 'the best' defrag utility in the life time of a computer will be less than the time you would have to spend finding out which is 'the best' defragger. |
Guest (0) | ||
| 37473 | 2002-03-01 07:20:00 | Hi, Thanks for your responses, though Id admit this has kinda got me quite peeed off! The fact that I spent money to upgrade the basic utensil you get in Windows expecting to get better and benefit more from these expensive price products and yet here I am paying $178 for Norton, $278 for the full version of disk defragmenter (Executive Software), which is the same one used by windows (only the lite version of Executive software) seems to me that I haven't gained a bit. I would of thought at least companines would stick by their product in its effectiveness when in the end, I get the same result from a pimp squeek utensil. I arrest my case.... disgruntled customer; Symantec, Executive Software |
Guest (0) | ||
| 1 | |||||