[access-uk] Re: Diskeeper
- From: "Chris Hallsworth" <christopherhallsworth71@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <access-uk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2007 21:46:45 +0100
Douglas and all, I would advise you to turn off all protection software
whilst doing a defragmentation, since they're the ones that can often write
to and read from a disk, hence the fact that it takes longer to defragment
with protection software running than them not running. However, I suggest
you leave your screen reader running so you can at least review how far
along it's going. Hope this helps.
Chris Hallsworth
Why not join my Blind Hobbyist mailing list! To join, send a blank message
to blind-hobbyist-subscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
----- Original Message -----
From: "Douglas Harrison" <harrison1d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <access-uk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2007 9:14 PM
Subject: [access-uk] Re: Diskeeper
Chris,
Searching through some very old messages I have found one (2005) in
which someone claimed that once Diskeeper had been run on a machine,
even if it had then been uninstalled, a file within Windows was changed
slightly and could prevent the XP defragmenter performing normally. As I
said in my earlier message I did briefly try Diskeeper in 2004, so this may
be the explanation of the failure of the XP defragmenter to recognise the
need for defragmentation on my system..
of course i have no grounds for saying that there is a general problem with
the tool provided by Microsoft.
Incidentally when doing the defrag with Diskeeper, I initially left the
screen
reader, NOD32, Spysweeper and firewall running normally, but unloaded
them all when after 6 hours I had not even reached 50%. Thins then
speeded up considerably, so I suspect that lack of resources was part of the
problem.
Douglas
.
On 9 Aug 2007 at 20:38, Chris Hallsworth wrote:
> Oh my goodness Douglas, so you're saying the Windows defragmenter is not
> recommended? If not, then I may give Diskeeper another shot. I think the
> reason why it took 8 hours is because, and this is only a guess, your
> drive hasn't been "optimized" before with Diskeeper. However, it should
> not last as long as that for subsequent defragmentations. Thanks for
>
--
Douglas Harrison
** To leave the list, click on the immediately-following link:-
** [mailto:access-uk-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe]
** If this link doesn't work then send a message to:
** access-uk-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
** and in the Subject line type
** unsubscribe
** For other list commands such as vacation mode, click on the
** immediately-following link:-
** [mailto:access-uk-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=faq]
** or send a message, to
** access-uk-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the Subject:- faq
** To leave the list, click on the immediately-following link:-
** [mailto:access-uk-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe]
** If this link doesn't work then send a message to:
** access-uk-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
** and in the Subject line type
** unsubscribe
** For other list commands such as vacation mode, click on the
** immediately-following link:-
** [mailto:access-uk-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=faq]
** or send a message, to
** access-uk-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the Subject:- faq
Other related posts:
