Defragmentation

[Ma No]

I notice that after using the defrag utility in XP, there are a few files
that remain fragmented. Diskkeeper and others advertise that they will
defrag these files too and that this will improve performance. I've also
read that the native XP program is good enough. Has anyone noticed a
difference in computer performance using one of these purchased special
programs and the native program?

Thanks

Ma No

[Peter]

I bought Diskeeper Pro and find it works like a dream with no leftover
fragmented files. Faster and more thorough, plus it has a "set it and
forget it" feature and many options for customizing.

--
Peter
Windows XP Home SP1. Pentium 4 @ 3.0ghz, 160gb HD, 1.00gb RAM
"Ma No" > wrote in message
hlink.net...
> I notice that after using the defrag utility in XP, there are a few files
> that remain fragmented. Diskkeeper and others advertise that they will
> defrag these files too and that this will improve performance. I've also
> read that the native XP program is good enough. Has anyone noticed a
> difference in computer performance using one of these purchased special
> programs and the native program?
>
> Thanks
>
> Ma No
>
>

[Kristi]

Ma No wrote:
> I notice that after using the defrag utility in XP, there are a few files
> that remain fragmented. Diskkeeper and others advertise that they will
> defrag these files too and that this will improve performance. I've also
> read that the native XP program is good enough. Has anyone noticed a
> difference in computer performance using one of these purchased special
> programs and the native program?
>
> Thanks
>
> Ma No

I bought Raxco's PerfectDisk - much faster and does a great job of ordering
files for a noticeably faster boot. You can get a free trial to give it a
shot.
hth
Kristi
--
Shuttle AN35N Ultra, XP2600Bart(11.5x400), 512mb, GeF3Ti200, WinXPproSP1.
Defragger Raxco PerfectDisk6 rocks! fast!

[Alex Nichol]

Ma No wrote:

>I notice that after using the defrag utility in XP, there are a few files
>that remain fragmented. Diskkeeper and others advertise that they will
>defrag these files too and that this will improve performance. I've also
>read that the native XP program is good enough. Has anyone noticed a
>difference in computer performance using one of these purchased special
>programs and the native program?

My main reason for using another (Perfect Disk) is that it does not
require 15% free space before it will work, and does 'defrag' the free
space.

The few files that are in use so that they will not defrag 'on line'
are not likely to be seriously fragmented - and fragmentation of them
may not in fact matter much. Page file for example = the need to defrag
that is much exaggerated


--
Alex Nichol MS MVP (Windows Technologies)
Bournemouth, U.K. (remove the D8 bit)