re: ME Defrag on 98 vs. Diskeeper Lite
Thursday, July 14, 2005 at 9:01 am
Windows 98 Annoyances Discussion Forum
Posted by DNA
(553 messages posted)
The Windows ME defrag.exe is 100% compatible with Windows 98, and MUCH faster.
The advantage of ME defragmenter over Diskeeper Lite
is that ME defrag does not leave open spaces after defragmentation. Diskeeper (main)
was designed to run as a continuous background process, so the leaving of open spaces
doesn't matter when it runs that way.
A contiguous defrag (that is, not leaving open spaces) is
most important on non-OS data partitions. If you defrag such a partition with Diskeeper
Lite (because of the open spaces left) it will have fragmentation the moment any
new data is added. With ME defrag, no free spaces are left, so data files created
after the defragmentation will not be fragmented. You only need to defrag such a
partition when files are modified or deleted.
The operating system partition (C:) will always fragment. In practice, I've found
that ME defrag works as fast as Diskeeper Lite. The speed advantage of leaving open
spaces ala Diskeeper seems to be offset over time by ME Defrag's keeping data contiguous,
which means ME doesn't have to work 'as hard'.
- Written in response to:
- ME Defrag on 98 (KateM: Thursday, July 14, 2005 at 2:29 am)
There are presently no replies to this message.
|
|
All messages in this thread [show all]
 |  | re: ME Defrag on 98 vs. Diskeeper Lite (DNA: Thu, Jul 14, 2005, 9:01 am) |
| |
| |
| |
Return to the Windows 98 Discussion Forum
|
|
