Win XP Defrag OR Norton Speed Disk?
by dromel - 1/19/05 1:06 PM
Does anyone have a strong opinion as to which prog is more efficient, Win XP Defrag OR Norton Speed Disk?
I feel that I should be consistent in only using one, or the other.
ATTENTION: UPDATE to forum outage (3/10/2014): The update to our site has gone on longer than anticipated. So the forums will continue to be in READ ONLY mode until further notice. Please do accept my apologizes for this inconvenience.
--Lee Koo, CNET Community
by: dromel January 19, 2005 1:06 PM PST
0 people like this thread
depends on how you have yer system set up.. do you have your operating system on its own partition.. ntfs
I keep my operating system on its own five gig partition this isolates it completely and keeps thrd party programs from getting mixed in cuz i install the programs onto a seperate partition... I use the xp defragg on c drive (operating system) and its very fast... think of the operating system like an office. if the office is smaller .. files will be easier to fetch and put back..at arms length..
Your comment that you keep your OS in a separate partition sounds good. Would you post some info about how a newby can do that?! Thanks.
Don't the applications have to be installed on the same partition that the operating system is on? If you partition the drive and install the operating system on one partition, how do you load the applications on the other partition?
No, the applications do not have to be installed on the same partition, or even the same disk, as the OS.
Each patition will get it's own drive letter and you just install to whichever drive letter you desire...
Under XP it is possible to make a hard disk partition appear as a folder on another disk. So you can have "Program Files" folder actually be another disk partition. There is also software to create hard links to make a folder on one drive refer to another location altogether. An example of such software is Link Magic http://www.rekenwonder.com/linkmagic.htm
same partition, and even same drive are not necessary
You can have winXP on your 1st hardrive, M$ Office on your 2nd hardrive, and a bunch of Word, text, Excel, PowerPoints on a 3rd hardrive, but all those files will still read just fine as long as winXP can detect and recognize those other 2 drives
Installing Programs to Other than ''C'' Partition
It's very simple, for most software these days. When the installer indicates the default location, note that there is usually a ''browse'' button alongside it. Use the browse button to move to a different ''programs'' folder on a different partition. Personally, I have Windows and all utilities, anti-virus, etc. in the C partition, all applications in the D partition, and relocated the My Documents folder (data) to the E partition. Why? It simplifies both defragging and backing up. The E partition is the one that most needs frequent backing up and defragging, and the C partition the least.
Next time you install an application, don't simply click through the default settings offered by the wizard. A closer look will often show the Destination Folder, with the option for user input. This is often the first option presented in the InstallShield or Wise interface. It always defaults to %systemdrive%:\Program Files, though you can enter or browse to any drive and folder you desire.
It reduces fragmentation of each separate partition, and inoculates your programs from damage to your operating system. If a disaster requires you to reinstall Windows, you'll be surprised at the accessibility to programs and files separated by a partition.
MickeyD215 just recommended relocating a user's Documents and Settings to another drive. The target can easily be changed under each user's document properties. This effectively backs his files up against certain types of failures.
If you're serious about isolating your programs from the system drive, you may have to uninstall them--reinstalling them to a different drive that you have or create for the purpose.
program files on a seperate partition
Regarding putting your program files on a seperate partition. If your doing it so your program files don't mess up your OS files it really doesn't make any difference. The problems programs usually create are in the registry and regardless what partition you install the program files to many will still install a lot of files into the OS registry. It probably helps with defragging but it doesn't prevent programs from damaging your OS.
You simply change the partition where you install the programs when installing the programs.
You are not obliged to install in the same partition.
You could even install different programs on different partitions though it is not very convenient for maintaining your computer.
No, in fact you can have seperate partitions, or even drives for OS, Programs, & stored data. In fact I have my system set up so that all progams store their data on a seperate drive from everything else. That way if the OS or programs start giving me trouble or the drive crashes all my data is safe & I can just re-install the program. I also have this drive on a raid, so that it is consistantly backed up.
I whole agree. I have the OS in one partition, the programs in another and the data in a third one. So when backing up I can have different schedules for different partitions. The OS is less frequently, the programs whenever I add new programs and the Data weekly or more frequently, depending on how important they are.
OS and Apps in Separate Partitions: Caution?
Some programs must be in sync with the registry. If your OS and Apps are in separate partitions, you have to be careful how you back up and restore each.
In addition, parts of some (poorly written) apps may assume the default C drive even though the install offers you the choice of drives and therefore don't work very well unless installed in C.
With XP. . .
I use Windows, it appears to be more effecient with the NTFS file system. With W98SE I use Nortons.
Click here to see the CNet faces, learn a little about internet
connections and data, and download free software.
Suppose you were an idiot. . . And suppose you were a member of Congress. . . But I repeat myself.
and a reminder for me to see. I have been using Norton's for defrag with my Win98se, WinME, and WinXP desktops, except several months ago I used the Windows defrag. I didn't pay much attention, but need to run again with both to see how long it takes. I have over 400,000 files on my WinXP 100GB drive so it takes a while. Norton's claims to be faster. As far as which does the best on actual defrag...is up for grabs.
I use Diskeeper. It is extremely fast for NTSF but, not so fast for fat32. It does an excellent job for both. I also like the bootime feature it has so, no programs or processes are running at the time. You can also set it to defrag you virtual memory. It also does an excellent job compressing the disk. I admit I have not tried Norton's speed disk but, will stick with Diskeeper. Skip
Diskeeper and XP Defrag the same
The XP Defrag is now made by the same company that makes Diskeeper, (Executive Software). If you look at the two interfaces they are the same.
They are not made by the same people. Diskeeper just integrates with windows defrag and uses their gui.
Executive Software DOES INDEED make both the WinXP (&Win2k) defragger and Diskeeper.
Absolutely... The windows XP defrag utility is a lite version of Diskkeeper.
"The Windows Disk Defragmenter tool is a limited version of the Diskeeper program from Diskeeper Corporation. Disk Defragmenter does not include all the features available in the full version of Diskeeper."
XP Defrag = diskeeper lite.
Windows incorporates many 3rd party utilities into it's OS. It strips out many features and gives you a lite version to accomplish simple tasks, where the 3rd companies give you more advanced features.
Some OS lite utilities and there corresponding adavnced parent apps.
XP Defrag = Diskeeper
NTbackup = Veritas Backup Exec
SQL Reporting Service = Crystal Reports
Diskeeper - made by Executive Software - used to make a defrag utility called "Diskeeper Lite". They sold this to Microsoft who watered it down even farther, to become XPO's defrag system.
The diskeeper in windows is an older version.
I believe it was diskeeper 4.0 the new one is
diskeeper 9.0 and of course there are two versions of it, standard and pro.
Executive Software owned Diskeeper when they developed the defragging program for Microsoft. The defragger they developed was uniquely different from any of the programs Diskeeper marketed.
Diskeeper Lite was a free downloadable program available from Executive Software to try out, with many of the best features of the regular program locked out. (Eg, ''Download and forget it'')
Back in the days when Diskeeper Lite was still available, you could download it and it would run circles around Win defragger.
The Windows defragger was written completely to Microsoft's specs and has never been available any way other than buying a copy of Windows. (Although why would anyone WANT it?)
Diskeeper DOES make Windows Defrag Program
Executive Software has made Window's Defrag program for several years. Microsoft just bought a very scaled down version. Diskeeper 9.0 will defrag so fast you cannot believe it happened. Go to www.executivesoftware.com and choose to download the free version for consumers. You will be amazed.
True that Executive Software provides...
the native XP defragger, BUT the commercial version is indeed faster and has more capability.
Kind of like Microsoft provides a basic word processor in the integrated WordPad, it also makes a commercial version, Word, that is much more capable and has many more options.
Not a true blue Diskeeper
That's true. WindowsXP incorporates Diskeeper for defragment of files, but its not the full version. If you want to get the full benefits of Diskeeper buy the software.
i dont think diskeeper made the winxp defragger because if they did, why would they compare it and say its crap