View Single Post
Old January 23rd 04, 10:43 PM
external usenet poster
Posts: n/a

Patch wrote:
"bigmike" wrote in message
. net...

I have Diskeeper and Norton Systemworks 2003 on my PC. I am using
XP Pro. If I defrag with Diskeeper (which will tell me drive is
done) and then use Norton Speedisk, Norton will run for a long
while before it says the drive is defragmented. If I run Norton
first and then use Diskeeper, Diskeeper will only run a short while
and then say the drive is done. Which one do you guys think does a
more thorough job because mine are both trial versions and I have to
pay for one sooner or later. Does Norton do a better job or just
take a lot longer than Diskeeper to do the same thing?


Diskeeper is a keeper!

Gotta agree there. I've tried both Diskeeper and Speedisk extensively and
noticed no discernable difference in performance after using either. In fact
Speedisk actually destroyed a couple of my older HDDs (8-10GB), I used it
frequently and it thrashes the **** out of the disk, causing waaaay more
wear'n'tear than the disk would see during normal use. After a while I ended
up with bad sectors all over the place, something which didn't happen with
identical HDDs I didn't use Speedisk with.


I no longer install Norton Systemworks '03 on my machines.