Disk defrager for Vista (FREE)

Discussion in 'Windows 64bit' started by Kue2, Mar 5, 2007.

  1. Kue2

    Kue2 Guest

    Kue2, Mar 5, 2007
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Kue2

    Kue2 Guest

    Just finished running this defrager.It is extremely fast & Graphical too.
    This ones a keeper!!!!

    "Kue2" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > http://www.auslogics.com/
    Kue2, Mar 5, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. W2K, XP, Vista, 2003 - but, no mention of 64bit in there?


    Tony. . .


    "Kue2" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Just finished running this defrager.It is extremely fast & Graphical too.
    > This ones a keeper!!!!
    >
    > "Kue2" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > > http://www.auslogics.com/

    >
    Tony Sperling, Mar 5, 2007
    #3
  4. Kue2

    Kue2 Guest

    Hi Tony!
    I ran it in vista 64 no problem installing or using the software.

    "Tony Sperling" <> wrote in message
    news:O53L$...
    > W2K, XP, Vista, 2003 - but, no mention of 64bit in there?
    >
    >
    > Tony. . .
    >
    >
    > "Kue2" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> Just finished running this defrager.It is extremely fast & Graphical too.
    >> This ones a keeper!!!!
    >>
    >> "Kue2" <> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >> > http://www.auslogics.com/

    >>

    >
    >
    Kue2, Mar 5, 2007
    #4
  5. I just fetched it for my W2K system, to see - O.K. I give it a whirl all
    around.


    Tony. . .


    "Kue2" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Hi Tony!
    > I ran it in vista 64 no problem installing or using the software.
    >
    > "Tony Sperling" <> wrote in message
    > news:O53L$...
    > > W2K, XP, Vista, 2003 - but, no mention of 64bit in there?
    > >
    > >
    > > Tony. . .
    > >
    > >
    > > "Kue2" <> wrote in message
    > > news:...
    > >> Just finished running this defrager.It is extremely fast & Graphical

    too.
    > >> This ones a keeper!!!!
    > >>
    > >> "Kue2" <> wrote in message
    > >> news:...
    > >> > http://www.auslogics.com/
    > >>

    > >
    > >

    >
    Tony Sperling, Mar 5, 2007
    #5
  6. Kue2

    Jane C Guest

    Works fine in x64. :)

    --
    Jane, not plain ;) 64 bit enabled :)
    Batteries not included. Braincell on vacation ;-)
    "Tony Sperling" <> wrote in message
    news:O53L$...
    > W2K, XP, Vista, 2003 - but, no mention of 64bit in there?
    >
    >
    > Tony. . .
    >
    >
    > "Kue2" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> Just finished running this defrager.It is extremely fast & Graphical too.
    >> This ones a keeper!!!!
    >>
    >> "Kue2" <> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >> > http://www.auslogics.com/

    >>

    >
    >
    Jane C, Mar 5, 2007
    #6
  7. Kue2

    John Barnes Guest

    Some of the defraggers have been erasing restore points on Vista. Has
    anyone checked this one.


    "Kue2" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Hi Tony!
    > I ran it in vista 64 no problem installing or using the software.
    >
    > "Tony Sperling" <> wrote in message
    > news:O53L$...
    >> W2K, XP, Vista, 2003 - but, no mention of 64bit in there?
    >>
    >>
    >> Tony. . .
    >>
    >>
    >> "Kue2" <> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >>> Just finished running this defrager.It is extremely fast & Graphical
    >>> too.
    >>> This ones a keeper!!!!
    >>>
    >>> "Kue2" <> wrote in message
    >>> news:...
    >>> > http://www.auslogics.com/
    >>>

    >>
    >>

    >
    John Barnes, Mar 6, 2007
    #7
  8. Kue2

    Kue2 Guest

    Ran this defrager on Vista 64 then on XP 64 then on XP no problems very
    very fast.

    "John Barnes" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Some of the defraggers have been erasing restore points on Vista. Has
    > anyone checked this one.
    >
    >
    > "Kue2" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> Hi Tony!
    >> I ran it in vista 64 no problem installing or using the software.
    >>
    >> "Tony Sperling" <> wrote in message
    >> news:O53L$...
    >>> W2K, XP, Vista, 2003 - but, no mention of 64bit in there?
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> Tony. . .
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> "Kue2" <> wrote in message
    >>> news:...
    >>>> Just finished running this defrager.It is extremely fast & Graphical
    >>>> too.
    >>>> This ones a keeper!!!!
    >>>>
    >>>> "Kue2" <> wrote in message
    >>>> news:...
    >>>> > http://www.auslogics.com/
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>>

    >>

    >
    Kue2, Mar 6, 2007
    #8
  9. OK, I'm having a hard time understanding why you think you need a defragger
    in Vista. XP x64? Certainly. But Vista has automatic background
    defragmentation built in to the OS. IME, it stays quite well defragged.

    --
    Charlie.
    http://msmvps.com/xperts64


    "Kue2" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > http://www.auslogics.com/
    Charlie Russel - MVP, Mar 6, 2007
    #9
  10. On 06.03.2007 04:21, Kue2 wrote:
    >
    > Ran this defrager on Vista 64 then on XP 64 then on XP no problems
    > very very fast.


    And you are sure it actually did defrag the drive and not do something else?

    robert
    Robert Klemme, Mar 6, 2007
    #10
  11. I ran this on W2K, 22% fragmentation was absolved in just over an hour (
    1:09 ) - I rather think the standard Windows tool would do roughly the same.
    But it's a very nice job, very good report facility, and thorough
    defragging.

    The most interesting thing was, that when it starts up the file-space
    display is firmly compacted and it stays compacted during all of it's
    processing - counter that with the windows tool that seems not to do any
    compacting (free space defragmentation) at all. Job done, have a look at it
    in the Windows version, and the free space is a total mess again. This is
    hinting that the 'display' function of any such tool is responsible for the
    looks and do not reflect the processing power or functionality of any of
    those utilities at all.

    Conclusion - I like the 'auslogic' defragger quite a bit better than the
    Windows standard, but I've stopped thinking that there is anything actually
    'better' out there!


    Tony. . .


    "Kue2" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >
    > Ran this defrager on Vista 64 then on XP 64 then on XP no problems very
    > very fast.
    >
    > "John Barnes" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > > Some of the defraggers have been erasing restore points on Vista. Has
    > > anyone checked this one.
    > >
    > >
    > > "Kue2" <> wrote in message
    > > news:...
    > >> Hi Tony!
    > >> I ran it in vista 64 no problem installing or using the software.
    > >>
    > >> "Tony Sperling" <> wrote in message
    > >> news:O53L$...
    > >>> W2K, XP, Vista, 2003 - but, no mention of 64bit in there?
    > >>>
    > >>>
    > >>> Tony. . .
    > >>>
    > >>>
    > >>> "Kue2" <> wrote in message
    > >>> news:...
    > >>>> Just finished running this defrager.It is extremely fast & Graphical
    > >>>> too.
    > >>>> This ones a keeper!!!!
    > >>>>
    > >>>> "Kue2" <> wrote in message
    > >>>> news:...
    > >>>> > http://www.auslogics.com/
    > >>>>
    > >>>
    > >>>
    > >>

    > >

    >
    Tony Sperling, Mar 6, 2007
    #11
  12. work fine too

    At my mashine too
    jk
    Juergen Kluth, Mar 7, 2007
    #12
  13. Kue2

    John Barnes Guest

    But, did you check to see if your Vista Restore points were still there
    after running in Vista. Guess since they would be lost when you booted into
    XP there was no reason to.

    "Kue2" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >
    > Ran this defrager on Vista 64 then on XP 64 then on XP no problems very
    > very fast.
    >
    > "John Barnes" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> Some of the defraggers have been erasing restore points on Vista. Has
    >> anyone checked this one.
    >>
    >>
    >> "Kue2" <> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >>> Hi Tony!
    >>> I ran it in vista 64 no problem installing or using the software.
    >>>
    >>> "Tony Sperling" <> wrote in message
    >>> news:O53L$...
    >>>> W2K, XP, Vista, 2003 - but, no mention of 64bit in there?
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> Tony. . .
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> "Kue2" <> wrote in message
    >>>> news:...
    >>>>> Just finished running this defrager.It is extremely fast & Graphical
    >>>>> too.
    >>>>> This ones a keeper!!!!
    >>>>>
    >>>>> "Kue2" <> wrote in message
    >>>>> news:...
    >>>>> > http://www.auslogics.com/
    >>>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>

    >>

    >
    John Barnes, Mar 7, 2007
    #13
  14. I installed and ran this on XP x64 with a RAID. It really is faster than the
    standard utility. And a nice thing to work with - I still like it a lot!
    Cannot comment as to any Vista Restore Points.


    Tony. . .


    "Tony Sperling" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > I ran this on W2K, 22% fragmentation was absolved in just over an hour (
    > 1:09 ) - I rather think the standard Windows tool would do roughly the

    same.
    > But it's a very nice job, very good report facility, and thorough
    > defragging.
    >
    > The most interesting thing was, that when it starts up the file-space
    > display is firmly compacted and it stays compacted during all of it's
    > processing - counter that with the windows tool that seems not to do any
    > compacting (free space defragmentation) at all. Job done, have a look at

    it
    > in the Windows version, and the free space is a total mess again. This is
    > hinting that the 'display' function of any such tool is responsible for

    the
    > looks and do not reflect the processing power or functionality of any of
    > those utilities at all.
    >
    > Conclusion - I like the 'auslogic' defragger quite a bit better than the
    > Windows standard, but I've stopped thinking that there is anything

    actually
    > 'better' out there!
    >
    >
    > Tony. . .
    >
    >
    > "Kue2" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > >
    > > Ran this defrager on Vista 64 then on XP 64 then on XP no problems

    very
    > > very fast.
    > >
    > > "John Barnes" <> wrote in message
    > > news:...
    > > > Some of the defraggers have been erasing restore points on Vista. Has
    > > > anyone checked this one.
    > > >
    > > >
    > > > "Kue2" <> wrote in message
    > > > news:...
    > > >> Hi Tony!
    > > >> I ran it in vista 64 no problem installing or using the software.
    > > >>
    > > >> "Tony Sperling" <> wrote in message
    > > >> news:O53L$...
    > > >>> W2K, XP, Vista, 2003 - but, no mention of 64bit in there?
    > > >>>
    > > >>>
    > > >>> Tony. . .
    > > >>>
    > > >>>
    > > >>> "Kue2" <> wrote in message
    > > >>> news:...
    > > >>>> Just finished running this defrager.It is extremely fast &

    Graphical
    > > >>>> too.
    > > >>>> This ones a keeper!!!!
    > > >>>>
    > > >>>> "Kue2" <> wrote in message
    > > >>>> news:...
    > > >>>> > http://www.auslogics.com/
    > > >>>>
    > > >>>
    > > >>>
    > > >>
    > > >

    > >

    >
    >
    Tony Sperling, Mar 8, 2007
    #14
  15. Probably for the same reason I'm looking for one myself, there is no progress
    meter or anything to say how long is left, there is no Analyze like XP. In
    short, I hate it. It's the first thing I've come across in Vista that I
    really hate so far.

    I just know my husband is going to hate it when he gets his Vista too. How
    can I point and laugh at his messy drive now when I can't show him my
    spotlessly clean one :(

    "Charlie Russel - MVP" wrote:

    > OK, I'm having a hard time understanding why you think you need a defragger
    > in Vista. XP x64? Certainly. But Vista has automatic background
    > defragmentation built in to the OS. IME, it stays quite well defragged.
    >
    > --
    > Charlie.
    > http://msmvps.com/xperts64
    >
    >
    > "Kue2" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > > http://www.auslogics.com/

    >
    =?Utf-8?B?bWlyYW1pczgy?=, Mar 28, 2007
    #15
  16. Very good point, 'M'. I am affraid Microsoft, through all of their
    existence, has totally neglected the most valuable 'scorn' and 'disdain'
    factors.


    Tony. . .


    "miramis82" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Probably for the same reason I'm looking for one myself, there is no

    progress
    > meter or anything to say how long is left, there is no Analyze like XP.

    In
    > short, I hate it. It's the first thing I've come across in Vista that I
    > really hate so far.
    >
    > I just know my husband is going to hate it when he gets his Vista too.

    How
    > can I point and laugh at his messy drive now when I can't show him my
    > spotlessly clean one :(
    >
    > "Charlie Russel - MVP" wrote:
    >
    > > OK, I'm having a hard time understanding why you think you need a

    defragger
    > > in Vista. XP x64? Certainly. But Vista has automatic background
    > > defragmentation built in to the OS. IME, it stays quite well defragged.
    > >
    > > --
    > > Charlie.
    > > http://msmvps.com/xperts64
    > >
    > >
    > > "Kue2" <> wrote in message
    > > news:...
    > > > http://www.auslogics.com/

    > >
    Tony Sperling, Mar 28, 2007
    #16
  17. Kue2

    Kue2 Guest

    http://www.softpedia.com/get/System/Hard-Disk-Utils/Auslogics-Disk-Defrag.shtml


    "miramis82" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Probably for the same reason I'm looking for one myself, there is no
    > progress
    > meter or anything to say how long is left, there is no Analyze like XP.
    > In
    > short, I hate it. It's the first thing I've come across in Vista that I
    > really hate so far.
    >
    > I just know my husband is going to hate it when he gets his Vista too.
    > How
    > can I point and laugh at his messy drive now when I can't show him my
    > spotlessly clean one :(
    >
    > "Charlie Russel - MVP" wrote:
    >
    >> OK, I'm having a hard time understanding why you think you need a
    >> defragger
    >> in Vista. XP x64? Certainly. But Vista has automatic background
    >> defragmentation built in to the OS. IME, it stays quite well defragged.
    >>
    >> --
    >> Charlie.
    >> http://msmvps.com/xperts64
    >>
    >>
    >> "Kue2" <> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >> > http://www.auslogics.com/

    >>
    Kue2, Mar 28, 2007
    #17
  18. There's no progress meter but then there's no reason to ever explicitly run
    it. It JFW. Silently. In the background. without my having to do anything.

    And I've verified the results with PerfectDisk. It's really quite good.

    --
    Charlie.
    http://msmvps.com/xperts64
    http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel


    "miramis82" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Probably for the same reason I'm looking for one myself, there is no
    > progress
    > meter or anything to say how long is left, there is no Analyze like XP.
    > In
    > short, I hate it. It's the first thing I've come across in Vista that I
    > really hate so far.
    >
    > I just know my husband is going to hate it when he gets his Vista too.
    > How
    > can I point and laugh at his messy drive now when I can't show him my
    > spotlessly clean one :(
    >
    > "Charlie Russel - MVP" wrote:
    >
    >> OK, I'm having a hard time understanding why you think you need a
    >> defragger
    >> in Vista. XP x64? Certainly. But Vista has automatic background
    >> defragmentation built in to the OS. IME, it stays quite well defragged.
    >>
    >> --
    >> Charlie.
    >> http://msmvps.com/xperts64
    >>
    >>
    >> "Kue2" <> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >> > http://www.auslogics.com/

    >>
    Charlie Russel - MVP, Apr 1, 2007
    #18
  19. Kue2

    John E Guest

    I've been using Perfect disk for a while, and about once a week (or maybe a
    bit less often), it decides that I should do an offline defrag to correct
    the metafile fragmentation which seems to build up extremely quickly. Does
    the built-in defragger deal with this? Is it actually something that needs
    attending to?

    John

    "Charlie Russel - MVP" <> wrote in message
    news:D...
    > There's no progress meter but then there's no reason to ever explicitly
    > run it. It JFW. Silently. In the background. without my having to do
    > anything.
    >
    > And I've verified the results with PerfectDisk. It's really quite good.
    >
    > --
    > Charlie.
    > http://msmvps.com/xperts64
    > http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel
    >
    >
    > "miramis82" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> Probably for the same reason I'm looking for one myself, there is no
    >> progress
    >> meter or anything to say how long is left, there is no Analyze like XP.
    >> In
    >> short, I hate it. It's the first thing I've come across in Vista that I
    >> really hate so far.
    >>
    >> I just know my husband is going to hate it when he gets his Vista too.
    >> How
    >> can I point and laugh at his messy drive now when I can't show him my
    >> spotlessly clean one :(
    >>
    >> "Charlie Russel - MVP" wrote:
    >>
    >>> OK, I'm having a hard time understanding why you think you need a
    >>> defragger
    >>> in Vista. XP x64? Certainly. But Vista has automatic background
    >>> defragmentation built in to the OS. IME, it stays quite well defragged.
    >>>
    >>> --
    >>> Charlie.
    >>> http://msmvps.com/xperts64
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> "Kue2" <> wrote in message
    >>> news:...
    >>> > http://www.auslogics.com/
    >>>

    >
    John E, Apr 1, 2007
    #19
  20. Charlie,

    I would like to know how it JFW. I believe it should, but when Live Care
    says, "We have to skip this disk because it's too fragmented" and goes on it
    s marry way, A better tool is needed. So I manually ran defrag, and I
    couldn't even find a "Hey this completed!!" Only a last run.

    Scott

    "Charlie Russel - MVP" wrote:

    > There's no progress meter but then there's no reason to ever explicitly run
    > it. It JFW. Silently. In the background. without my having to do anything.
    >
    > And I've verified the results with PerfectDisk. It's really quite good.
    >
    > --
    > Charlie.
    > http://msmvps.com/xperts64
    > http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel
    >
    >
    > "miramis82" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > > Probably for the same reason I'm looking for one myself, there is no
    > > progress
    > > meter or anything to say how long is left, there is no Analyze like XP.
    > > In
    > > short, I hate it. It's the first thing I've come across in Vista that I
    > > really hate so far.
    > >
    > > I just know my husband is going to hate it when he gets his Vista too.
    > > How
    > > can I point and laugh at his messy drive now when I can't show him my
    > > spotlessly clean one :(
    > >
    > > "Charlie Russel - MVP" wrote:
    > >
    > >> OK, I'm having a hard time understanding why you think you need a
    > >> defragger
    > >> in Vista. XP x64? Certainly. But Vista has automatic background
    > >> defragmentation built in to the OS. IME, it stays quite well defragged.
    > >>
    > >> --
    > >> Charlie.
    > >> http://msmvps.com/xperts64
    > >>
    > >>
    > >> "Kue2" <> wrote in message
    > >> news:...
    > >> > http://www.auslogics.com/
    > >>

    >
    =?Utf-8?B?U2NvdHQ=?=, Apr 5, 2007
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Mike245

    good free software to do a disk to disk copy?

    Mike245, Jan 18, 2006, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    433
  2. I love Google
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    982
  3. Kue2
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    423
  4. Giuen
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    834
    Giuen
    Sep 12, 2008
  5. Mr Pounder

    Defrager

    Mr Pounder, Jan 16, 2010, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    447
    thanatoid
    Jan 17, 2010
Loading...

Share This Page