July 31, 200322 yr Hi all,Norton has a 'speed disk' option, anyone used it and any benefit with it done....?thanks for any info :DSteve
July 31, 200322 yr Steve, I don't bother with it. I'm now in the habit of defragging every month to keep things running smoothly. To me it'd be redundant.Rick Rick
July 31, 200322 yr Not sure what you're saying here. Speed Disk is a defragger. If you have it, there's no reason to use the built-in WinXP defragger. I don't know how much real-world difference it makes, but Speed Disk re-arranges files on the HD as it defrags to improve disk access. Frequently accessed files are put at the "front" of the HD and frequently modified files are put at the back.Dan
July 31, 200322 yr Hi guys,Thanks for the replys :D yep new it was a defrag/optimizer just wanted to see what other peeps thought about it.Steve
July 31, 200322 yr >Not sure what you're saying here. Speed Disk is a defragger.> If you have it, there's no reason to use the built-in WinXP>defragger. I don't know how much real-world difference it>makes, but Speed Disk re-arranges files on the HD as it>defrags to improve disk access. Frequently accessed files are>put at the "front" of the HD and frequently modified files are>put at the back.>>DanThat's exaxtly what a defragger does, alright. Why use the built-in Win-XP defragger? 'Cause it's built in, I guess? They both defrag. Couldn't we just say the same about Norton? To me it's a secondary application. After-the fact. Moot. Hence, redundant. Unless someone points out how much more efficient the Norton program is over an intrinsic program?... Rick
July 31, 200322 yr I haven't used Norton for a long time, but to my mind the built in XP defragger does nothing more than consolidate free space - and it even manages to do that badly.Rick, with you're atitude why don't you just stand there.. something's bound to happen.Cheers,Paulhttp://www.strontiumdog.plus.com/sbird.jpgOfficially licenced by British Airways plc for use of name and logo[p]AMD XP2800+ Barton, Gigabyte GA-7NNXP nForce2, 1Gig Crucial PC3200 DDR 400MHz, Gainward 128 MB GF4-4200, SB Audigy, 3 x WD Caviar SE[/p]
August 1, 200322 yr >Rick, with you're atitude why don't you just stand there..>something's bound to happen.Wait. I think something did happen...oh. Nope. It was just...you. I had an opinion. You don't have to like or agree with it now, do you? Thanks for the chastising, though. I'm probably better for it. Somehow...Regards, Rick
August 1, 200322 yr >That's exaxtly what a defragger does, alright.Uh, no it doesn't. The XP defragger does just that. Defrags. Nothing more. No rearranging of files or optimizing of the page file.Did you miss where I said if you have it? If you have both, I'd go with Speed Disk. If you don't, you could probably get by with the XP defragger. Just saying that Speed Disk adds additional functionality that is not in the XP defragger.
August 1, 200322 yr >I haven't used Norton for a long time, but to my mind the>built in XP defragger does nothing more than consolidate free>space - and it even manages to do that badly.>Now I'm curious; since you haven't used Norton for a long time and XP doesn't do it well enough for you, what do you use? Rick
August 1, 200322 yr >But now you're just wasting time on>me.you got that right!Paulhttp://www.strontiumdog.plus.com/sbird.jpgOfficially licenced by British Airways plc for use of name and logo[p]AMD XP2800+ Barton, Gigabyte GA-7NNXP nForce2, 1Gig Crucial PC3200 DDR 400MHz, Gainward 128 MB GF4-4200, SB Audigy, 3 x WD Caviar SE[/p]
August 1, 200322 yr >Unless someone points out how much more efficient the Norton program is over an intrinsic program?...Just responding to this comment from your post #4, but I see I'm wasting my time. Facts don't seem to interest you.
Create an account or sign in to comment