Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Windows XP Diskeeper

Last response: in Windows XP
Share
July 25, 2005 7:46:07 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.help_and_support (More info?)

I would like to install Diskeeper 8.0 and use instead of the one that came
with Windows XP. I have checked and they at Executive Software said that the
one in XP was a Diskeeper earlier edition around a 1.5. What do I do to
install 8.0. Thanks everyone for the help and all have a good day, JJ

More about : windows diskeeper

Anonymous
July 25, 2005 4:10:18 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.help_and_support (More info?)

"JJ" <JJ@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:47F32195-3451-433A-A0BB-977FDA2175D8@microsoft.com...
>I would like to install Diskeeper 8.0 and use instead of the one that came
> with Windows XP. I have checked and they at Executive Software said that
> the
> one in XP was a Diskeeper earlier edition around a 1.5. What do I do to
> install 8.0. Thanks everyone for the help and all have a good day, JJ

Actually you should use version 9.0 of Diskeeper.
As regards the install process - you just run the setup and it will replace
the built in defrag tool with the full version of Diskeeper.

--

Regards,

Mike
--
Mike Brannigan [Microsoft]

This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
rights

Please note I cannot respond to e-mailed questions, please use these
newsgroups

"JJ" <JJ@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:47F32195-3451-433A-A0BB-977FDA2175D8@microsoft.com...
>I would like to install Diskeeper 8.0 and use instead of the one that came
> with Windows XP. I have checked and they at Executive Software said that
> the
> one in XP was a Diskeeper earlier edition around a 1.5. What do I do to
> install 8.0. Thanks everyone for the help and all have a good day, JJ
July 25, 2005 4:10:19 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.help_and_support (More info?)

"Mike Brannigan [MSFT]" <mikebran@online.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:e1VZ9mQkFHA.1204@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...

> Actually you should use version 9.0 of Diskeeper.
> As regards the install process - you just run the setup and it will
> replace the built in defrag tool with the full version of Diskeeper.
> --
> Regards,
>
> Mike
> --
> Mike Brannigan [Microsoft]
>
> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
> rights
>
> Please note I cannot respond to e-mailed questions, please use these
> newsgroups

Mike:
The above was your response to a query from a poster inquiring about what
version of a third-party disk defragmenting utility he or she should use.

I'm curious to know Microsoft's position on the use of these third-party
"defragmenters" in terms of their perceived usefulness in general, and
especially in comparison to the defragmenting utility included in the XP OS.

I would particularly like you to comment on the following article on the
value of defragmenting programs published in the February, 2004 issue of PC
World...

"When was the last time you defragmented your hard disk? As your PC creates,
modifies, and deletes files on the hard drive, files tend to get broken up
into pieces that are physically scattered around the disk. Drives and file
systems are built to keep track of these noncontiguous file parts, but if a
significant portion of your hard drive has become fragmented, its
performance might suffer.

Then again, it might not. When the PC World Test Center set out to determine
the effectiveness of the defrag utilities in our set of suites, plus that of
Diskeeper 8 from Executive Software, our analysts found no evidence that
defragmentation enhanced performance. On a desktop system from the PC World
office with a heavily used, never-fragmented hard drive, the lab conducted
speed tests using a range of applications before and after defragmenting the
drive with each utility. In the end, the Test Center saw no significant
performance improvement after defragmenting with any program This result
flies in the face of the perceived wisdom that fragmentation hinders
performance, though much older PCs (with slower and smaller hard drives) and
heavily used servers may benefit from defragging.

Fortunately, you don't have to buy a defragger to see if it will boost
performance on your system: Every copy of Windows comes with a
defragmentation tool. However, it is not particularly easy to use. Diskeeper
8 Professional Edition offers set-it-forget-it scheduling options, the
ability to prioritize or skip defragmentation of specific files, and a
display that predicts how much faster your system will be after
defragmentation. Our tests didn't validate those predictions, though; again,
we say no performance gains after defragmenting."

Looking forward to your response, especially should it represent the
"official" view of Microsoft..
Anna
Related resources
Anonymous
July 25, 2005 8:06:07 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.help_and_support (More info?)

Anna,

I cannot on that particular study without knowing the finite details etc.
But there have been others conducted in the past
such as
http://www.executive.com/diskeeper/IDC-White-Paper.pdf from Diskeeper Corp
(formally Executive software) a paper by IDC
That would counter that paper.
There are also other products available - notably those from Raxco (Perfect
Disk - another good product) and they too have produced figures for their
products.
NTSL have also done some testing around this www.nstl.com

Ultimately the choice to use a product is up to the consumer and they should
evaluate the benefits of a product prior to making a purchasing decision.

As regards the differences between the built in defragmentation product and
another third party product; Diskeeper did a comparison vs. their product at
http://files.diskeeper.com/pdf/DK-WINXP-2000_Comparison...

--

Regards,

Mike
--
Mike Brannigan [Microsoft]

This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
rights

Please note I cannot respond to e-mailed questions, please use these
newsgroups

"Anna" <myname@myisp.net> wrote in message
news:%23vCacASkFHA.3580@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>
> "Mike Brannigan [MSFT]" <mikebran@online.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:e1VZ9mQkFHA.1204@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>
>> Actually you should use version 9.0 of Diskeeper.
>> As regards the install process - you just run the setup and it will
>> replace the built in defrag tool with the full version of Diskeeper.
>> --
>> Regards,
>>
>> Mike
>> --
>> Mike Brannigan [Microsoft]
>>
>> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
>> rights
>>
>> Please note I cannot respond to e-mailed questions, please use these
>> newsgroups
>
> Mike:
> The above was your response to a query from a poster inquiring about what
> version of a third-party disk defragmenting utility he or she should use.
>
> I'm curious to know Microsoft's position on the use of these third-party
> "defragmenters" in terms of their perceived usefulness in general, and
> especially in comparison to the defragmenting utility included in the XP
> OS.
>
> I would particularly like you to comment on the following article on the
> value of defragmenting programs published in the February, 2004 issue of
> PC World...
>
> "When was the last time you defragmented your hard disk? As your PC
> creates,
> modifies, and deletes files on the hard drive, files tend to get broken up
> into pieces that are physically scattered around the disk. Drives and file
> systems are built to keep track of these noncontiguous file parts, but if
> a
> significant portion of your hard drive has become fragmented, its
> performance might suffer.
>
> Then again, it might not. When the PC World Test Center set out to
> determine
> the effectiveness of the defrag utilities in our set of suites, plus that
> of
> Diskeeper 8 from Executive Software, our analysts found no evidence that
> defragmentation enhanced performance. On a desktop system from the PC
> World
> office with a heavily used, never-fragmented hard drive, the lab conducted
> speed tests using a range of applications before and after defragmenting
> the
> drive with each utility. In the end, the Test Center saw no significant
> performance improvement after defragmenting with any program This result
> flies in the face of the perceived wisdom that fragmentation hinders
> performance, though much older PCs (with slower and smaller hard drives)
> and
> heavily used servers may benefit from defragging.
>
> Fortunately, you don't have to buy a defragger to see if it will boost
> performance on your system: Every copy of Windows comes with a
> defragmentation tool. However, it is not particularly easy to use.
> Diskeeper
> 8 Professional Edition offers set-it-forget-it scheduling options, the
> ability to prioritize or skip defragmentation of specific files, and a
> display that predicts how much faster your system will be after
> defragmentation. Our tests didn't validate those predictions, though;
> again,
> we say no performance gains after defragmenting."
>
> Looking forward to your response, especially should it represent the
> "official" view of Microsoft..
> Anna
>
Anonymous
July 28, 2005 2:29:31 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.help_and_support (More info?)

AFAIK - Microsoft has a deal with diskeeper so that you will be using their
program as part of windows, albeit the latest version if that's what you
will install.

Good luck.

"Anna" <myname@myisp.net> wrote in message
news:%23vCacASkFHA.3580@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>
> "Mike Brannigan [MSFT]" <mikebran@online.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:e1VZ9mQkFHA.1204@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>
>> Actually you should use version 9.0 of Diskeeper.
>> As regards the install process - you just run the setup and it will
>> replace the built in defrag tool with the full version of Diskeeper.
>> --
>> Regards,
>>
>> Mike
>> --
>> Mike Brannigan [Microsoft]
>>
>> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
>> rights
>>
>> Please note I cannot respond to e-mailed questions, please use these
>> newsgroups
>
> Mike:
> The above was your response to a query from a poster inquiring about what
> version of a third-party disk defragmenting utility he or she should use.
>
> I'm curious to know Microsoft's position on the use of these third-party
> "defragmenters" in terms of their perceived usefulness in general, and
> especially in comparison to the defragmenting utility included in the XP
> OS.
>
> I would particularly like you to comment on the following article on the
> value of defragmenting programs published in the February, 2004 issue of
> PC World...
>
> "When was the last time you defragmented your hard disk? As your PC
> creates,
> modifies, and deletes files on the hard drive, files tend to get broken up
> into pieces that are physically scattered around the disk. Drives and file
> systems are built to keep track of these noncontiguous file parts, but if
> a
> significant portion of your hard drive has become fragmented, its
> performance might suffer.
>
> Then again, it might not. When the PC World Test Center set out to
> determine
> the effectiveness of the defrag utilities in our set of suites, plus that
> of
> Diskeeper 8 from Executive Software, our analysts found no evidence that
> defragmentation enhanced performance. On a desktop system from the PC
> World
> office with a heavily used, never-fragmented hard drive, the lab conducted
> speed tests using a range of applications before and after defragmenting
> the
> drive with each utility. In the end, the Test Center saw no significant
> performance improvement after defragmenting with any program This result
> flies in the face of the perceived wisdom that fragmentation hinders
> performance, though much older PCs (with slower and smaller hard drives)
> and
> heavily used servers may benefit from defragging.
>
> Fortunately, you don't have to buy a defragger to see if it will boost
> performance on your system: Every copy of Windows comes with a
> defragmentation tool. However, it is not particularly easy to use.
> Diskeeper
> 8 Professional Edition offers set-it-forget-it scheduling options, the
> ability to prioritize or skip defragmentation of specific files, and a
> display that predicts how much faster your system will be after
> defragmentation. Our tests didn't validate those predictions, though;
> again,
> we say no performance gains after defragmenting."
>
> Looking forward to your response, especially should it represent the
> "official" view of Microsoft..
> Anna
>
!