Defrag on XP?

[The Unknown P]

Uninstall Diskeeper lite and use the generic XP defrag
utility. It is designed for XP and does a better job than
any add ons or third party software like Symantec's disk
optimizer. Most third part defraggers are not configured
for the XP hive and so do not do a good job. Keep smiling.

[Michael Solomon \(MS-MVP Windows Shell/User\)]

He can certainly do that to get back to XP's disk defragmenter but it is
hardly generic. It provided by Executive Software and is nearly identical
to Diskeeper Lite.

There is a third party defragmenter that also works quite well and is faster
and more robust then the XP Defragmenter and has been optimized for XP, it's
called PerfectDisk and a 30 day free trial version can be downloaded from
the following site, you might want to check it out:
http://www.raxco.com/products/downloadit/perfectdisk2000_download.cfm

--
Michael Solomon MS-MVP
Windows Shell/User
Backup is a PC User's Best Friend
DTS-L.Org: http://www.dts-l.org/

"The Unknown P" > wrote in message
...
> Uninstall Diskeeper lite and use the generic XP defrag
> utility. It is designed for XP and does a better job than
> any add ons or third party software like Symantec's disk
> optimizer. Most third part defraggers are not configured
> for the XP hive and so do not do a good job. Keep smiling.

[Cate]

I've been using the Symantec defrag on my XP machine with no problems. If I
opt to use the built-in defragger is it safe to do so after using Symantec?
XP has been so stable after Win98 that I don't want to do anything to muck
things up.



"Michael Solomon (MS-MVP Windows Shell/User)" > wrote in
message ...
> He can certainly do that to get back to XP's disk defragmenter but it is
> hardly generic. It provided by Executive Software and is nearly identical
> to Diskeeper Lite.
>

Michael Solomon wrote:

> There is a third party defragmenter that also works quite well and is
faster
> and more robust then the XP Defragmenter and has been optimized for XP,
it's
> called PerfectDisk and a 30 day free trial version can be downloaded from
> the following site, you might want to check it out:
> http://www.raxco.com/products/downloadit/perfectdisk2000_download.cfm

[Michael Solomon \(MS-MVP Windows Shell/User\)]

I don't see any reason why you couldn't go back to the built in defragger.
There should be no problem in that regard.

--
Michael Solomon MS-MVP
Windows Shell/User
Backup is a PC User's Best Friend
DTS-L.Org: http://www.dts-l.org/

"Cate" > wrote in message
nk.net...
> I've been using the Symantec defrag on my XP machine with no problems. If
I
> opt to use the built-in defragger is it safe to do so after using
Symantec?
> XP has been so stable after Win98 that I don't want to do anything to muck
> things up.
>
>
>
> "Michael Solomon (MS-MVP Windows Shell/User)" > wrote in
> message ...
> > He can certainly do that to get back to XP's disk defragmenter but it is
> > hardly generic. It provided by Executive Software and is nearly
identical
> > to Diskeeper Lite.
> >
>
> Michael Solomon wrote:
>
> > There is a third party defragmenter that also works quite well and is
> faster
> > and more robust then the XP Defragmenter and has been optimized for XP,
> it's
> > called PerfectDisk and a 30 day free trial version can be downloaded
from
> > the following site, you might want to check it out:
> > http://www.raxco.com/products/downloadit/perfectdisk2000_download.cfm
>
>

[Cate]

Thank you.

"Michael Solomon (MS-MVP Windows Shell/User)" > wrote in
message ...
> I don't see any reason why you couldn't go back to the built in defragger.
> There should be no problem in that regard.
>
> --
> Michael Solomon MS-MVP
> Windows Shell/User
> Backup is a PC User's Best Friend
> DTS-L.Org: http://www.dts-l.org/
>
> "Cate" wrote in message
> > I've been using the Symantec defrag on my XP machine with no problems.
If
> I
> > opt to use the built-in defragger is it safe to do so after using
> Symantec?
> > XP has been so stable after Win98 that I don't want to do anything to
muck
> > things up.

[Michael Solomon \(MS-MVP Windows Shell/User\)]

You're welcome.

--
Michael Solomon MS-MVP
Windows Shell/User
Backup is a PC User's Best Friend
DTS-L.Org: http://www.dts-l.org/

"Cate" > wrote in message
ink.net...
> Thank you.
>
> "Michael Solomon (MS-MVP Windows Shell/User)" > wrote in
> message ...
> > I don't see any reason why you couldn't go back to the built in
defragger.
> > There should be no problem in that regard.
> >
> > --
> > Michael Solomon MS-MVP
> > Windows Shell/User
> > Backup is a PC User's Best Friend
> > DTS-L.Org: http://www.dts-l.org/
> >
> > "Cate" wrote in message
> > > I've been using the Symantec defrag on my XP machine with no problems.
> If
> > I
> > > opt to use the built-in defragger is it safe to do so after using
> > Symantec?
> > > XP has been so stable after Win98 that I don't want to do anything to
> muck
> > > things up.
>
>

[Vaughn McMillan - Executive Software]

Xref: kermit microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics:160443

On Fri, 24 Oct 2003 21:12:19 -0700, "The Unknown P" >
wrote:

>Uninstall Diskeeper lite and use the generic XP defrag
>utility. It is designed for XP and does a better job than
>any add ons or third party software ...

I know of several million people who would disagree with that
statement. The generic XP defrag utility is substantially slower, less
robust, and has fewer features than most of the third-party offerings.

Even Diskeeper Lite outperforms the built-in defragger, and it's
nowhere near the defragger the full Diskeeper is (or several of the
other third-party defraggers, for that matter).

To the original poster: Somewhere along the line someone installed
Diskeeper Lite on the computer in question. I'd recommend getting one
of the full-featured third-party defraggers. Here are a few, but there
are others:

Diskeeper, by Executive Software - www.diskeeper.com

O&O Defrag, by O&O Software - www.oo-defrag.com.

PerfectDisk, by Raxco - www.raxco.com

Vaughn McMillan
Executive Software