Free space must be defragmented, not just occupied space. Imagine that all files are contiguous, but not compacted together, so there are milliards of very small free space fragments instead of few big ones. The next sizeable file that will be created may not fit in one nor two nor ten of the contiguous free spaces, and so even though old files are all defragmented, any new files will be fragmented and so you’ll have to defragment soon. If free space was defragmented, newly created files would fit whole, or minimally fragmented, in the big contiguous free space, and so you wouldn’t need to defragment again so often.
True story: I have a virtual machine whose virtual disc file was around 1 GB big. JUST after defragging with JkDefrag, I used the virtual machine and so made its HD grow (not much). Result: the HD file was now broken in over 100 fragments (!!); this sent the virtual machine’s performance down the drain. Then I decided to give the Windows defragger a shot, and it compacted the file into just 3 fragments, besides otherwise fixing my crippling free space fragmentation (after a long time using JkDefrag). Result: the performance was several orders of magnitude better. Ran Contig after that, and it finished the virtual HD into one single fragment. Now I only use the Windows defragger, only after specific operations that create major fragmentation (such as major installations or, most times, system restores), and that file (now 1.5 GB) and every other, specially the crucial system ones, are kept always defragged.
About the placement optimization, as I said I don’t think it’s really worth it. Actually there are several sorting criteria you can choose in JkDefrag, and they are mutually incompatible, so you have to choose one. And yet JkDefrag won’t tell you which one is best, because nobody knows. And I think nobody knows because there’s no discernible diference between using any of them, or using none at all.
Actually the defraggers in Windows aren’t developed by MS I think. The one in Win98SE was made by Intel, and the one in 2000, XP and 2003 is a lite version of Diskeeper.
Try [url=http://www.auslogics.com/en/downloads/disk-defrag/disk-defrag-setup.exe]Auslogics Disk Defrag[/url]
or [url=http://dw.com.com/redir?edId=3&siteId=4&oId=3001-2094_4-10897113&ontId=2094_4&spi=1078f0f9258b684c4c20235001772fb0&lop=txt&tag=idl2&pid=10897113&mfgId=6271865&merId=6271865&pguid=DgWzrAoPjGEAACd56u0AAAAY&destUrl=http%3a%2f%2fsoftware-files.download.com%2fsd%2f604TvAR9VDYcngfMuBUAXhyI5CsBmCrLteLaYps6Vv80cjoFhsGyHoq_rmWeVze0V3CUmdtGNLVV8Qp82MUvFMRF53eir4Ru%2fsoftware%2f10897113%2f10759533%2f3%2fDefragSetup.exe%3flop%3dlink%26ptype%3d1901%26ontid%3d2094%26siteId%3d4%26edId%3d3%26spi%3d1078f0f9258b684c4c20235001772fb0%26pid%3d10897113%26psid%3d10759533]Iobit Smartdefrag[/url]
Advance system care is very annoying with nags to upgrade to the paid version, telling you you have loads of problems, it quite brings to mind rogues like AV 2009. I have stopped those by using CFP to deny it access to the internet. I did like Advanced windows care as it was though.
Once Comodo Windows Tweaker (or whatever it will be called) is launched I will surely ditch Iobit.
Does Auslogics have this feature, that isn’t in Jk?:
Free space must be defragmented, not just occupied space. Imagine that all files are contiguous, but not compacted together, so there are milliards of very small free space fragments instead of few big ones. The next sizeable file that will be created may not fit in one nor two nor ten of the contiguous free spaces, and so even though old files are all defragmented, any new files will be fragmented and so you'll have to defragment soon. If free space was defragmented, newly created files would fit whole, or minimally fragmented, in the big contiguous free space, and so you wouldn't need to defragment again so often.
True story: I have a virtual machine whose virtual disc file was around 1 GB big. JUST after defragging with JkDefrag, I used the virtual machine and so made its HD grow (not much). Result: the HD file was now broken in over 100 fragments (!!); this sent the virtual machine’s performance down the drain. Then I decided to give the Windows defragger a shot, and it compacted the file into just 3 fragments, besides otherwise fixing my crippling free space fragmentation (after a long time using JkDefrag). Result: the performance was several orders of magnitude better. Ran Contig after that, and it finished the virtual HD into one single fragment. Now I only use the Windows defragger, only after specific operations that create major fragmentation (such as major installations or, most times, system restores), and that file (now 1.5 GB) and every other, specially the crucial system ones, are kept always defragged.
About the placement optimization, as I said I don’t think it’s really worth it. Actually there are several sorting criteria you can choose in JkDefrag, and they are mutually incompatible, so you have to choose one. And yet JkDefrag won’t tell you which one is best, because nobody knows. And I think nobody knows because there’s no discernible diference between using any of them, or using none at all.
Windows Cleaner: I use the built in Disk-cleanup tool in Vista, and Ccleaner on XP.
Registry Cleaner and Optimizer: None. Not worth the risk of damaging the registry.
Defrag & Optimizer: Diskeeper 2008 Professional. Easily the best defragmenter I’ve used- fast, powerful, great features not available in free defraggers, and really easy to use (automatic!).
Secure delete of files and free space: I’ve always used the secure file shredder in Spybot, basic but works okay. Never bothered to securely erase free space…I always physically destroy my drives containing sensitive data when they are to be replaced.
Undelete and Recovery of deleted files; Never used it myself, but the systems admins at our computing lab swear by Undelete 2009. Made by the same guys who make Diskeeper.
