Hi, I was thinking whether IObit Smart Defrag is better or Windows default defragmenter or both are same (so that I should remove IObit Smart Defrag)?
Does IObit SD give any advantage over Windows default?
__________________
Quote:
“The Web is like a dominatrix. Everywhere I turn, I see little buttons ordering me to Submit.”
ASUS P5KPL AM/PS | P4 @ 3.07GHz | Ubuntu 11.04 / Win Server 2k8 / XP SP3 | 1GB DDR2 | Samsung HD080HJ 80GB
Last edited by nisargshah95; 13-06-2011 at 12:26 AM.
Reason: Typo, solved
Advertisements. Register and be a member of the community to get rid of them.
I would prefer any external defrag app, then the windows default.
Windows default defragment app is going downhill with each successive Windows versions, in terms of amount of being informative.
Windows 98 was best in terms of that. Then XP. And now Windows 7 have made it worse, just shows percentage!
I use Defraggler.
__________________
Marty: Hey, Doc, we better back up. We don't have enough road to get up to 88.
Doc Brown: Roads? Where we're going, we don't need, "roads!" :)
──── On the Internet you can be Anything you want. It's Strange that, so many people choose to be Stupid! ────
I feel Windows 7 defragger is a step up from previous version.
Read this at Digit even, cant precisely remember the issue.
It may be. But I was just talking about the information it shows. I don't like the level of abstraction that software provides, as it increases in versions. Sure, sometimes, we don't need those extra information, and its better, if it just performs tasks, w/o the need for any user interruptions etc.. but sometimes, I want to see, what is happening in the background, specially, if it related with my files on those hard drives!
__________________
Marty: Hey, Doc, we better back up. We don't have enough road to get up to 88.
Doc Brown: Roads? Where we're going, we don't need, "roads!" :)
──── On the Internet you can be Anything you want. It's Strange that, so many people choose to be Stupid! ────
I still remember Windows 98 used to show boxes for fragments.
Was accurate till last box.
Yeah, and I loved that visual representation of the data. Actually there is a story associated.
Many years ago, when my computer was running Win 98, I put that to defragmentation, in the middle of the night. My dad came to my room, and asked me, why am I sitting idle in front of the computer, just staring at those colourful boxes. Then I explained him the concept and advantages of defragmentation. I told him, in an easy language, that each boxes on the monitor represent some portion of the file stored on the hard drive.
He then proceeded to ask me, what if we want to see what data is associated with a particular box? I had no answer to that question until much time after. I simply answered him, "No we can't".
So I ask the geeks here. Tell me how can we achieve that??
Quote:
Originally Posted by funkysourav
Auslogics Disk Defrag for me
faster than all the rest mentioned here
in fact the fastest available
That must be hard to measure, considering the fact, that you can't replicate the data distribution over different drives with such accuracy!
__________________
Marty: Hey, Doc, we better back up. We don't have enough road to get up to 88.
Doc Brown: Roads? Where we're going, we don't need, "roads!" :)
──── On the Internet you can be Anything you want. It's Strange that, so many people choose to be Stupid! ────
^^just run Auslogics and see
it doesn't exactly require rocket science to see which one is the fastest among two or three defragmentation tools
Spoiler:
if you really want to know,
i actually did a sector by sector clone of my system drive using Paragon Free
Defragmented with Defraggler, noted time, restored partition
then followed with windows defragmenter
then with Auslogics
i had time to kill so i put it to good use
^^just run Auslogics and see
it doesn't exactly require rocket science to see which one is the fastest among two or three defragmentation tools
Spoiler:
if you really want to know,
i actually did a sector by sector clone of my system drive using Paragon Free
Defragmented with Defraggler, noted time, restored partition
then followed with windows defragmenter
then with Auslogics
i had time to kill so i put it to good use
Did u ACTUALLY did that? Or was that sarcasm?
I will try Auslogics, and would like to see the difference myself then.
__________________
Marty: Hey, Doc, we better back up. We don't have enough road to get up to 88.
Doc Brown: Roads? Where we're going, we don't need, "roads!" :)
──── On the Internet you can be Anything you want. It's Strange that, so many people choose to be Stupid! ────
i did do actually do it vineet
its truth
sarcasm doesn't come easy for me
i even did spend my spare time noting the differences between Avira and Avast (5.xx)
using the same methods
just a few run of the mill tests like scan speeds, memory usage, response etc etc
if i didn't have Paragon B&R i wouldn't have bothered to do these at spare time
I'll go for Auslogics defrag. Its really fast and I have used many and many defrag software before coming to this conclusion. Its really damn fast and have some pretty good useful features too.
__________________
In war, Victory. In peace, Vigilance. In death, Sacrifice.
Using TDF through mobile. Digit optimized this forum for mobiles. Works nicely YAY :D:D
[SOLVED] IObit Smart Defrag or Windows default?
Re: IObit Smart Defrag or Windows default?
Re: IObit Smart Defrag or Windows default?
Linear Mode
