Defragging

[tlshell]

Someone posted recently asking about defragger because their Win98
defragger wouldn't run. I had the same trouble for the first time and
after cleaning up my registry didn't help, I poked around and
discovered from the information link below that the secret is to boot
into safe mode first, then run defragger. You may also want to try the
WinME defragger to replace Win98 defragger, that was another
recommendation that I found but haven't actually tried. This
information came from an old post I had archived. The zip file is very
small, only 95.5KB.

More info: http://www.annoyances.org/exec/forum/win98/r1018558615
Download: http://www3.sympatico.ca/one.human/programs/WinME_Defrag.zip

 

[Chuck Mattsen]

On 04 Jul 2003 14:47:38 GMT
(e-mail address removed) wrote:

tlshell> You may also want to try the WinME defragger to replace
tlshell> Win98 defragger, that was another recommendation that I found
tlshell> but haven't actually tried.

I never had a problem with the Win98 degragger, but I can report that
replacing it with the WinME version of defragger works quite well; a
noticeable speed increase. I prefer using Diskeeper Lite, however.

I've also never found it necessary to defrag from safe mode; making
sure there are no running processes (AV program, etc.) should be
sufficient. It also helps to defrag immediately after booting, as
opposed to when the system's been up and running for a while,
presumably having to do with resizing of the swap file?

 

[Eric]

I never had a problem with the Win98 degragger, but I can report that

replacing it with the WinME version of defragger works quite well; a
noticeable speed increase. I prefer using Diskeeper Lite, however.

I've also never found it necessary to defrag from safe mode; making
sure there are no running processes (AV program, etc.) should be
sufficient. It also helps to defrag immediately after booting, as
opposed to when the system's been up and running for a while,
presumably having to do with resizing of the swap file?

I apologize in advance for this not being a "freeware" reply, but I have
noticed (in XP) that the built in defragger works far better than any
freeware or other (speed disk from Norton) defraggers, which surprises
me. Has anyone else noticed this?



Eric

 

[SINNER]

Eric Wrote in alt.comp.freeware, on Fri, 04 Jul 2003 16:49:54 -0000:

I apologize in advance for this not being a "freeware" reply, but I have
noticed (in XP) that the built in defragger works far better than any
freeware or other (speed disk from Norton) defraggers, which surprises
me. Has anyone else noticed this?

What is so surprising? It wasn't made by M$ its the Diskeeper license I
believe.

 

[My Name]

Internet Explorer by spyglass was it.

NCSA Mosaic

 

[Alan]

What is so surprising? It wasn't made by M$ its the Diskeeper license
I believe.

Previous "MS" versions were under license from Symantec I believe.

 

[CeeJay]

I apologize in advance for this not being a "freeware" reply, but I have

noticed (in XP) that the built in defragger works far better than any
freeware or other (speed disk from Norton) defraggers, which surprises
me. Has anyone else noticed this?

I haven't. I still think the builtin defrag leaves much to be desired.
I use Perfect Disk 6.0 (not freeware)