Discussion in 'backup, imaging & disk mgmt' started by jon_fl, Mar 27, 2005.
Anybody using it? How do you like it? Any comments or recommendations welcomed.
A thread that might interest you Jon.
Jon, found another thread for you.
Thanks again Big Buck. Perfect Disk seems to be a favorite. I wonder if anyone tried mst and PD and can give a comparison of the two. I like the convenience of mst defragging on the fly. The mst comments don't hit too much on the performance aspect though.
The standard windows (XP) defragger has always done me just fine. Quick, easy and runs in the background. I can't ask for any more.
I use mst defrag. Used PD and O&O before, also the alternative of mst called "BuzzSaw" from http://www.dirms.com/
While PD and O&O allow a fine grained control about what is defragmented where, it is being said that they can leave files fragmented. mst is a set-and-forget tool which from my experience stops fragmentation completely while consuming not even 2mb memory.
There is a explorer right-click extension (FragExt from http://www.mutexed.com/code/FragExt/ ) which allows to see how fragmented files are and since I'm using mst in the background I haven't noticed a single fragmented file on my HD anymore.
However, there is software which obviously doesn't like that reading/writing in the background at all like VirusBuster. I didn't had any loss of data but several BSOD's. Together with NOD32 there is no problem at all.
tBB I am trialing mst . Does mst run with icon in the task bar always? Rather than in system tray ( next to clock) . If not how can I change the settings? Also did you place mst in startup folder? thanks . I do like mst and after a day or so of running I can feel the diffirence , in that all my programmes are flowing really well together .A Very nice defrag.
You don't need to run the main application (mstdefrag.exe) all the time. The program is mainly meant to control the service (mstdfrgs.exe) which does the defragmentation in the background. If the mstdfrg service runs you can safely quit mstdefrag.
The WinXP defrag utility works well - main complaint is the analysis results regarding advice on whether defragmentation is needed. I am a bit curious as to Windows standards regarding the amount of fragmentation needed to justify running the defrag utility. Anyone know?
I use avg fragments per file as a benchmark - 1.04 or greater - defrag.
Currently using trial version of PerfectDisk (just started trial) & have used Diskeeper Lite (nice freeware defrag utility), PowerDefrag & PageDefrag. I intend to try O&O in the future.
Separate names with a comma.