I've read a lot of what people have said here, and there's a lot of it. Therefore, I'm gonna keep this short.

I use Diskeeper 2007. I have also tried PerfectDisk8. In my experience, both helped system performance compared to no fragmentation (obviously).

Do I know 100% that one product does a better job in terms of system performance? No.

Do I know that one product does a better job of keeping frag levels in check without my intervention? Yes. Diskeeper does this. PerfectDisk requires me to set up a schedule. DK sets auto-defrag on all drives right from the get-go.

Have I seen any downside of not using PerfectDisk? Not really...


When considering which <insert_thing_here> is "better", you've gotta look at the big picture. Sure, if you wanted do, you could compile everything to assembly, and then try to optimize the assembly structure of your program to every little nitpicky bit, or, you can use a higher level language like .NET, Delphi, Java, etc etc etc. Just like here, you could try to argue about every little thing when it comes to defragmenters, but in the end, which is easier to use? In my opinion, Diskeeper has become truly set-it-and-forget-it (the option is on by default in the installer). Install, and never worry about it ever again.


Another thing to point out - time is money. To me, the time I save not having to worry about defragging my hard drive, or settings up a schedule, or whatever makes up for whatever price difference might come up between PD and DK.

Well said, Zxian. Well said, indeed.
RMS, take a look at the thread I linked (now far above) if you have any desire to nitpick any further. If anyone has dragged defrag program debating around, it's me. Zxian used to smack me around about it in the past.
Ease of use and time-is-money are the main points. Just let it go...
Now let's all go play games and tickle our younger siblings if we have any.

i really dont mean to bother anyone by bringing this topic back up but i couldnt keep myself from saying "THANK YOU AGAIN SO MUCH JEREMY" for the refrrence and infos(though i got nearly a headaches somewhere in middle of page 3 of the topic).

You're very welcome.

Agreed. Avoid Diskeeper.

Why? I've been using it for months. My fragments is 0. My fragmentation level is 0%. What's your logic other than simply agreeing with someone says? Why do they dislike it? Do you even know if your reason and their reason are the same? Explain yourself.

I do not know the answer to all you questions.

Something for you to try: Unistall Diskeeper. Then try to use (defragment) the defragmenter that comes with windows. The defragmenter may not fuction correctly (tested only on Windows 2000 Professional with Service Pack 4). Diskeeper seems to cripple the defragmenter that comes with Windows 2000.

You mean any of my questions.


I have no intention of trying this because:
A. I do not use Windows 2000.
B. I have removed the many-years-old obsolete defragmenter function with nLite.
C. As I have stated, DK2007 does everything for me automatically and waits for available resources. No need for anything else.

This post has been edited by Jeremy: Jan 20 2007, 07:50 PM

This thread is an interesting read. I actually enjoyed the debate on whether defragmentation software is needed as much as it used to be. IMHO, I believe the answer is yes AND no.

I'm sure many users today have more than one partition and/or drives on their computer. One drive/partition hold the OS, and the others hold data. The partition/drive holding the OS should be defragmented quite frequently as their are always many files that are updated, added, or deleted. That is a given.

But...

The other partitions that hold data, may or may not need defragmentation. For example, on one of my drives, I hold just media. The whole drive has nothing but music and video (technically it's a RAID array, but back to the point). As I add to this drive, I adjust tags and information and then I run one pass with something like Diskkeeper. Two or three weeks later, there is still zero to very little defragmentation since all I've done is read from the drive.

As far as my preference, I still choose Diskkeeper. It has features that I personally like and it also helps that I've used it for so long that I'm comfortable with it. Another small reason is because they are the ones that built Windows built in defragmenter. So if Microsoft can trust the software enough to ship it within Windows, it can't be all too bad. (Somewhat of a oxymoron since Windows itself doesn't always work right )

ok what services does diskeeper 2007 depends on?

Subcodec, a drive that is used for only storage/backup needs less defragmentation than an OS drive. Once a new file is written to disk for storage or backup is made, that must be defragmented. OS drives constantly need defragmentation which is where Diskeeper 2007 comes in handy as it is automatic. I've almost forgotten what fragmentation is nowadays; been using DK2007 so long.

ProjecTK, not sure. I have a lot of Services removed with nLite and then most disabled and DK2007 functions normally.

This post has been edited by Jeremy: Mar 24 2007, 09:37 PM