The subject says it all.

I saw a post by one of the MVPs (I believe it was R.C. White) who said
that "WinXP's built-in defragger works better than (Norton) SpeedDisk on
NTFS." I was wondering how Diskeeper compares to the built-in defragger
on NTFS?

I've been running Diskeeper and have been very happy with it but I was
just curious as to the comparison between the two defragmenters.

Thanks,
Rick

Diskeeper vs. Built-In Defragmenters
http://www.executive.com/diskeeper/d...kvsbuiltin.asp

Disk Defragmenter Limitations in Windows XP
http://support.microsoft.com/default...NoWebContent=1

PerfectDisk is also an excellent defragmenter:
http://www.raxco.com/products/perfectdisk2k/

--
Carey Frisch
Microsoft MVP
Windows XP - Shell/User

Be Smart! Protect your PC!
http://www.microsoft.com/security/protect/

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Rick Friedman" (E-Mail Removed) wrote in message:
news:%(E-Mail Removed)...

| The subject says it all.
|
| I saw a post by one of the MVPs (I believe it was R.C. White) who said
| that "WinXP's built-in defragger works better than (Norton) SpeedDisk on
| NTFS." I was wondering how Diskeeper compares to the built-in defragger
| on NTFS?
|
| I've been running Diskeeper and have been very happy with it but I was
| just curious as to the comparison between the two defragmenters.
|
| Thanks,
| Rick

The Defragmenting utility in XP is based upon diskeeper but is not as thorough as Diskeeper nor does it have as many options. I have Diskeeper and use it regularly. If on the other hand I had to spend money to buy a defragmenting utility I wouldn't bother. The XP Defrag utility is quite good enough for the OS and is free. }:~)
--
There are three types of people in computing, those that can count and those that can't.