PerfectDisk 8 Coming Soon (Info)

Discussion in 'backup, imaging & disk mgmt' started by Legendkiller, Sep 1, 2006.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Legendkiller

    Legendkiller Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2006
    Posts:
    1,052
    I just went to their website and saw that perfectdisk 8 will be launched on sept-12th and buying version:7 now will entitle you for a free upgrade of version 8.
    Visit website for more.
     
  2. Carver

    Carver Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2006
    Posts:
    1,827
    Location:
    USA
    I use Perfectdisk 7 :D
     
  3. Perman

    Perman Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2005
    Posts:
    2,160
    Hi,folks: I have an "once in the blue moon "opportunity to (1) make a choice between Perfect disk 8 and Diskeeper pro 10. (2) keep both. Which one to keep and how about keeping both? Why yes and why not. Your advice is greatly appreciated.
     
  4. Birdman

    Birdman Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2003
    Posts:
    571
    It's NOT recommended to use multiple defragment programs. I've used BOTH PD and DK in the past and from my own experience, PerfectDisk is the better choice. I've been using PD for three years now and I've never had a problem....not to mention that my system has never been FASTER!!!

    Just 1 person's opinion. :)
     
  5. InfinityAz

    InfinityAz Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2005
    Posts:
    828
    Location:
    Arizona
    I've been using PD for several years. I've tried many of them and PD has performed the best (especially, after you defrag the first time).
     
  6. WSFuser

    WSFuser Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2004
    Posts:
    10,632
    id stick to one defragmenter since they each may sort files differently. and between PD and Diskeeper only, my preference goes to PD.
     
  7. NAMOR

    NAMOR Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2004
    Posts:
    1,526
    Location:
    Arkham Asylum
    I saw a thread at DSLreports that had a couple of screen shots and a pic from a magazine ad.

    PerfectDisk 8 info!
     
  8. lodore

    lodore Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2006
    Posts:
    9,006
    ive used both and i had tons of problems when i had perfect disk installed but with diskeeper no problems what so ever and a faster pc.
     
  9. Tommy

    Tommy Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Posts:
    1,169
    Location:
    Buenos Aires - Munic
    I am using O&O Defrag since years. Don't intent to change. I think they do all nearly the same.
     
  10. WSFuser

    WSFuser Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2004
    Posts:
    10,632
    they all are designed to reduce and (if possible) eliminate fragmentation but they may also sort your files for better performance.

    PD's smartplacement goes by modification date, diskeeper i dont know, and o&o lets u defrag in most any method (modification or access date, name, space consolidation, etc)
     
  11. ErikAlbert

    ErikAlbert Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2005
    Posts:
    9,455
    I bought PerfectDisk, because I don't have to remember to exclude the folder "C:\$ISR\0\$ISRBIN" of FirstDefense-ISR manually. PerfectDisk excludes this folder automatically. It was a matter of convenience and lazyness.

    Defragmenters are quite boring softwares : click and wait until it's done without any form of excitement. :cautious:
     
  12. Howard Kaikow

    Howard Kaikow Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2005
    Posts:
    2,802
    I'd suggest PD.
    Use only 1 defragger.
     
  13. Acadia

    Acadia Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2002
    Posts:
    4,048
    Location:
    SouthCentral PA
    As I understand it, you should stick with just one defragger. They all use different algorithms to do the defragging, so each time that you change defraggers the previous one simply gets "undone" and is replaced with the new one. So your disk is not getting any more defragged; it is doing a lot of extra work for nothing. So whatever one you choose, just stick with it.

    Acadia
     
  14. NGRhodes

    NGRhodes Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2003
    Posts:
    2,331
    Location:
    West Yorkshire, UK
    Looks like they listened to my and others feature requests, this could well become my number 1 defragger :)
     
  15. VikingStorm

    VikingStorm Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2003
    Posts:
    387
    They should have just kept the old interface. Personally, I find the new interface hideous. Maybe it will be skinnable...
     
  16. NAMOR

    NAMOR Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2004
    Posts:
    1,526
    Location:
    Arkham Asylum

    It's not skinnable from what I can tell. I just got an email from Raxco for an "early bird" download of PD 8. I can't tell of the actual defrag process is any faster compared to ver. 7, but the analysis seems to be much faster.
     
  17. Legendkiller

    Legendkiller Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2006
    Posts:
    1,052
    good to hear that.
     
  18. WSFuser

    WSFuser Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2004
    Posts:
    10,632
    like namor said its not skinnable but its does have "styles" which changes the look of tabs, buttons, and the menu. theres Windows (normal), Windows XP, and Plastique.

    PD 8 hasnt changed dramatically and i agree the old interface looked better.
     
  19. TonyW

    TonyW Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2005
    Posts:
    2,634
    Location:
    UK
    I got the "early bird" invitation too, so already have PD v8 installed.
     
  20. crofttk

    crofttk Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2004
    Posts:
    1,976
    Location:
    Eastern PA, USA
    You now have some control over how much system priority to give PD and hence some control over the speed of defrag. I've been using PD 8 since the beginning of August.:D
     
  21. Perman

    Perman Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2005
    Posts:
    2,160
    Hi, folks: I have PD 8 ruuning on one PC, while Diskeeper Pro Premier running on the other. Both serve the purposes. I have no complaints, but I notice that there is one feature(I-FAAST) on Diskeeper pro premier, that PD 8 may be lacked of. If it is so, does it make a significant difference in term of performance quality?
     
  22. crofttk

    crofttk Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2004
    Posts:
    1,976
    Location:
    Eastern PA, USA
    If you'd care to explain what "I-FAAST" is, I might hazard a guess.
     
  23. Perman

    Perman Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2005
    Posts:
    2,160
    Hi, folks: I can only quote this from their web site: I-FAAST stands for Intelligent File Access Acceleration Sequencing Technology. I use it once a week while PC is completely idle, such as night time. The result is noticeable. I am just an average joe in computer science. Sorry, could not explain to you more.
     
  24. Ngwana

    Ngwana Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2006
    Posts:
    156
    Location:
    Glasgow, United Kingdom
    Good news indeed, i was almost wondering why Raxco was quite for a long time. The last small upgrade I recieved was build 46 (for PD 7). :D
     
  25. crofttk

    crofttk Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2004
    Posts:
    1,976
    Location:
    Eastern PA, USA
    Well, PerfectDisk does something that may be the same thing, if you let it, by arranging the least frequently accessed recently modified files together at the front of the drive and more frequently accessed recently modified files together at the end of used file space(Boot files are a different story, where PD will put those at the front of the drive if you want). This way frequently accessed recently modified files hang around the end of available drive space and files less likely to change and move are kept in a "stable" zone at the front of the drive. The idea is that the older files are in a contiguous location were fragmentation won't affect them and the other files stick with their own kind, thus helping to minimize the amount of file movement used in each defrag. Raxco's term for that is "Smart Placement".

    Since I don't know what logic IFAAST is based on and what the result is I can't really compare the two critically other than to guess, from it's name, that it's outcome is intended to speed up file access and minimize fragmentation and refragmentation.
     
    Last edited: Sep 9, 2006
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.