Without proper date stamps and the omission of product versions, readers really have no idea if the comparison is of value. Otherwise, this could be a really old review - especially since the revisions of the products was never mentioned - and features were changed since then. It's Feb 2012 as I write this and have to guess that the Aug review was performed in 2011 to omit having to show a year in the time stamp. Tis a pity that blog-like reviews, like this one, don't bother putting the year in the time stamp. If you only defrag using scheduled jobs (for when you won't be at the computer) then you'll probably want to leave priority at normal. This is a global option and not settable via command-line switches when using their df.exec to run scheduled defrags using Windows' Task Scheduler. This prevents the defrag operation from interfering the use of your computer due to impacted responsiveness while defragmenting. ![]() Defraggler can be configured (a global option, not a setting per defrag job) to run in normal or low priority. For Auslogics, you have to buy their payware version to get that feature. In fact, there is little feature-by-feature comparison in this review, just what the author happens to touch upon for his personal and limited use of the product(s).Īnother missed feature is Defraggler can be scheduled to perform a boot-time defrag (in its freeware version). This feature is missing in Defraggler (both freeware and payware versions). The idea is to prevent future fragmentation of the MFT. By clearing the MFT reserve area of normal files, further additions to the MFT will be contiguous instead of fragmented. When disk space is low, this reserved area (it's reserved for later use, if available, not allocated solely for use by the MFT) will be used for normal file storage and not be available to the MFT as more files are added hence fragmentation of the MFT. For example, Auslogics says it will move normal files out of the MFT reserve area. There was omission of several feature comparisons between the Auslogics and Piriform defragmenters. Of course, Windows own Task Scheduler is far superior to the one provided by either Auslogics or Defraggler. You have to run their df.exec from a command line and add it as an event in Task Scheduler. For example, Piriform's Defraggler does NOT provide a scheduler. This author might've been mixing freeware with payware. It would be courteous for an author of a review to note if they are testing or comparing freeware or payware versions. But, Defraggler’s extra funcions and nice GUI are nothing to laugh about. I personally use AusLogics Disk Defrag most of the time, as it gets the job done faster. So, not a big difference, but Auslogics came out a few seconds ahead. I ran both Disk Defrag and Defraggler on identical folders of extremely fragmented files.Īuslogics Disk Defrag finished in 19.2 seconds. ![]() In terms of perfomance, I decided to run a little experiment. In addition, it takes a great deal of CPU Power and memory to finish a defragmentation, not to mention the bizarre disk activity involved. Windows’ built in defragmenter is sluggish and slow. One of the most important parts of a Disk Defragmenter is its performance while cleaning up your files. It took around 4 times to get “performance” right. In terms of Functionality, the clear winner is
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |