Scarecrow Man Posted March 3, 2008 Report Share Posted March 3, 2008 From everyone here at Piriform, the company that brought you CCleaner and Recuva... we now bring you a file defragmentation tool... Defraggler!It differs from other defrag tools on the market, by enabling you to quickly and simply defrag the files you want to, without having to process the whole drive. Simply run it, select the file and defragment in seconds. No more struggling with the Windows defragmentation tool!Features:Defrag Individual FilesCompact and PortableVista SupportLocate Files on the DriveFreewarehttp://www.defraggler.com/Currently Beta Version Only Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scarecrow Man Posted March 3, 2008 Author Report Share Posted March 3, 2008 Wow thats fast. It did my 2GB flash drive in about 6 seconds. :0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ɹəuəllıʍ ʇɐb Posted March 4, 2008 Report Share Posted March 4, 2008 However...As much as I like and trust CCleaner, it is quite a different matter letting a new program (and beta, on top) defragment my hard drives. Defragmenting is a serious business, as it may move all your files and file fragments, plus possibly other data, all while Windows is up and running.Even with a regular backup, my data is too valuable for me to experiment with a new program like this! It may leave files damaged, but unnoticed. You may - years later - have need of that damaged file, but it's now permanently damaged, and your backups from the time when it was intact are long gone.When it comes to delicate operations as defragmenting, I can only trust companies that have very long experience in the field. I personally use Diskeeper by Executive Software, but I'm sure there are other professional that have a similar reputation.Defraggler, perhaps after release 3 or later, but never release 1.x, even once it's out of beta. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dencandy Posted March 4, 2008 Report Share Posted March 4, 2008 However...When it comes to delicate operations as defragmenting, I can only trust companies that have very long experience in the field. Defraggler, perhaps after release 3 or later, but never release 1.x, even once it's out of beta.I agree completely. Let's hope it's a good'un. But, Scarecrow Man, you always give very good advice but please print BETA in big red letters. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andsome Posted March 4, 2008 Report Share Posted March 4, 2008 If you do want to try it, better to make an up to date Acronis backup. Personally I see no reason to do away with Diskeeper 10, it suits me fine. :D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scarecrow Man Posted March 4, 2008 Author Report Share Posted March 4, 2008 I've used CCleaner since the early days when it was still known as CrapCleaner. I've used Recuva on several occasions to restore lost files (and it works great) and I'm now using Defraggler to defragment. I've not had a single problem with any software from Piriform. I think they make great programs that are easy to use and work great.I've tried many other defragment programs, but this one is going to be my favourtie I can tell.I've used the beta version with no negative effects on an 80GB IDE, 2GB Flash and now a 160GB SATA drive. I have not tried it in a RAID or SCSI setup yet so I cannot comment on that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scarecrow Man Posted March 4, 2008 Author Report Share Posted March 4, 2008 Just to show how well it works, I used the built in Windows Defragmenter once. It left me with over 20,000 fragments. I then user PowerDefragmenter from Microsoft (formerly Sysinternals). This left me with around 8,000 fragments. I then used Piriform Defraggler and I now have 105 fragments. I am sure they are all helping each other along in some way, and some may be reporting erroneously but I am happy with the results. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Irene Posted March 4, 2008 Report Share Posted March 4, 2008 Just to show how well it works, I used the built in Windows Defragmenter once. It left me with over 20,000 fragments. I then user PowerDefragmenter from Microsoft (formerly Sysinternals). This left me with around 8,000 fragments. I then used Piriform Defraggler and I now have 105 fragments. I am sure they are all helping each other along in some way, and some may be reporting erroneously but I am happy with the results.Sounds impressive to me. :D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dencandy Posted March 4, 2008 Report Share Posted March 4, 2008 I've tried many other defragment programs, but this one is going to be my favourtie I can tell.I've used the beta version with no negative effects on an 80GB IDE, 2GB Flash and now a 160GB SATA drive.Good for you Scarecrow Man. How long have you been using it then? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andsome Posted March 5, 2008 Report Share Posted March 5, 2008 I think that this with Diskeeper 10 speaks for itself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dencandy Posted March 11, 2008 Report Share Posted March 11, 2008 Just to show how well it works, I used the built in Windows Defragmenter once. It left me with over 20,000 fragments. I then user PowerDefragmenter from Microsoft (formerly Sysinternals). This left me with around 8,000 fragments. I then used Piriform Defraggler and I now have 105 fragments.Did you you notice any improvement in performance (access time, save time, etc) after each defrag, Scarecrow Man? Some people say the improvement obtained from defragmentation is much over-rated. This is due to the incredibly fast access times of modern hard-disks, as well as the effects of having plenty of RAM and a large paging file. Still, I always use one myself, partly because I don't like things being untidy.But 20,000 fragments, Scarecrow Man... phewww. Didn't your mum teach you to keep your bedroom tidy? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dencandy Posted March 17, 2008 Report Share Posted March 17, 2008 Did you you notice any improvement in performance (access time, save time, etc) after each defrag, Scarecrow Man? Some people say the improvement obtained from defragmentation is much over-rated.Scarecrow Man? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andsome Posted March 17, 2008 Report Share Posted March 17, 2008 Did you you notice any improvement in performance (access time, save time, etc) after each defrag, Scarecrow Man? Some people say the improvement obtained from defragmentation is much over-rated.Scarecrow Man?See my posting above with a print out of a diskeeper report. Why bother with second rate programs when Diskeeper is available? :D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boris Posted March 17, 2008 Report Share Posted March 17, 2008 Why bother with second rate programs when Diskeeper is available? :DThis one is free ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andsome Posted March 17, 2008 Report Share Posted March 17, 2008 Why bother with second rate programs when Diskeeper is available? :DThis one is free !You get what you pay for, Diskeeper is very reasonably priced for what it is. 105 fragments hardly compares with 0. :D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rong Posted March 17, 2008 Report Share Posted March 17, 2008 But it's Diskeeper that tells you there are none ;) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dencandy Posted March 17, 2008 Report Share Posted March 17, 2008 105 fragments hardly compares with 0. :DWhat's a few fragments between friends? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ɹəuəllıʍ ʇɐb Posted March 18, 2008 Report Share Posted March 18, 2008 New BETA release available: v1.01.064DownloadVersion History Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scarecrow Man Posted March 26, 2008 Author Report Share Posted March 26, 2008 Good for you Scarecrow Man. How long have you been using it then? About a week before I posted this info :)Did you you notice any improvement in performance (access time, save time, etc) after each defrag, Scarecrow Man? Some people say the improvement obtained from defragmentation is much over-rated. This is due to the incredibly fast access times of modern hard-disks, as well as the effects of having plenty of RAM and a large paging file. Still, I always use one myself, partly because I don't like things being untidy.But 20,000 fragments, Scarecrow Man... phewww. Didn't your mum teach you to keep your bedroom tidy?20,000 fragments is not uncommon and a heavily used machine. And you are correct that with the larger amounts of RAM in today's systems the hard drive is not used as frequently as it used to be, but that has little effect on hard drive fragmentation.Fragmentation happens when you open a file, and then close it (don't forget temporary files. They are written in the same way its not just files you open). Since the drive wants to keep up to the speed of your ram it quickly writes the data anywhere it can. Sometimes this means writing it across several different areas to do it quickly rather than searching for 1 contiguous spot for it to all fit. Do this with hundreds of files a day and you quickly become fragmented.Andsome: I love Disk keeper as well, but I think it may be reporting 0 fragments erroneously. Some files cannot be defragmented while in use such as system files.I did a full defrag this weekend, and then a partial defrag (files with more than 100 fragments) this morning and there is still quite a bit left. This is normal as a hard drive accesses and writes files constantly when opening or closing programs.Interestingly in this screenshot I report having 1,192 fragments, while the Windows defragment program shows 1,215 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark2 Posted March 26, 2008 Report Share Posted March 26, 2008 since the link was first posted, I've been trying it out.My normal defrag is O & O defragmenter set to defrag in the background when required, and a full defrag of my system at weekends, usually it would kick in on average every 2 days, dependant on my use of the pc. I cannot comment on performance increase/decrease when compared to the normal windows defragger. However when it kicks in it usually takes 10-15 minutes running in the background.Since using defraggler every other day, it hasn't kicked in at all in normal use. I've not even done the normal weekend defrag, but again I can't say I've noticed an increase in performance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ɹəuəllıʍ ʇɐb Posted April 15, 2008 Report Share Posted April 15, 2008 New BETA release available: v1.01.068DownloadVersion History Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theguy Posted April 15, 2008 Report Share Posted April 15, 2008 no problems with this piece of software wiv me Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sunray Posted April 16, 2008 Report Share Posted April 16, 2008 Some files cannot be defragmented while in use such as system files.If I am not wrong, most of the MFT can be defragged online, while the remainder has to be defragmented (along with the page file) during a boot-time defrag. To the best of my knowledge, there are no freeware apps that can defrag the MFT, online or during boot-time. Messing with the MFT is dangerous (can lose access to all the files) and you should be careful about which programs play with it.As for 20,000 fragments, that's quite a lot :lol: Fragmentation builds up between scheduled defragmentation runs due to file modification activity. The latest defraggers are more focused on automatic defragmentation rather than scheduled defragmentation due to the former's advantages. Fragmentation is kept in check all the time but without requiring any action by the user. From what I gather, auto defrag has become popular in industry since it reduces the workload of the IT folks (heavily used servers tend to fragment a lot). Even on a desktop, with an auto defragger running, it's unlikely that it will ever allow 20,000 fragments to take root.BTW, you are indeed a brave man. I, for one, cannot muster up the courage to let a BETA defragmenter have a free run of all the data on my disks (despite regular backups) :D . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scarecrow Man Posted April 17, 2008 Author Report Share Posted April 17, 2008 That's what a backup is for.To boldly test software you've no one has tested before! :lol:I can say I am quite happy with this program and will stick with it. Piriform is a great company and I believe they make great software. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ɹəuəllıʍ ʇɐb Posted May 16, 2008 Report Share Posted May 16, 2008 New BETA release available: v1.01.073DownloadVersion History Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.