IObit SmartDefrag Beta 4.03

Discussion in 'Computer Support' started by G. Morgan, Jan 24, 2008.

  1. G. Morgan

    G. Morgan Guest

    G. Morgan, Jan 24, 2008
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. G. Morgan

    VanguardLH Guest

    "G. Morgan" wrote in message
    news:...
    > IObit SmartDefrag Beta 4.03 is listed as the #1 download at
    > http://www.majorgeeks.com/download.php?det=5318 . Has anyone
    > experience with this defragger (good/bad)? Would you recommend it?



    Be aware that constant defragging of your hard drive can render
    useless any incremental backups of your hard drive which are image
    backups. By moving the sectors around, you end up forcing your backup
    software which is performing an image backup (not a file backup) to
    perform a full backup. For example, if you use Acronis True Image
    Home to save incremental *image* backups of your hard drive(s), and
    after performing a defrag, they warn that the effect would force a
    full image backup. That's why they don't recommend doing a defrag
    until just before your scheduled full image backup. Logical file
    backups would not be affected since it is unimportant and not recorded
    as to which sectors were occupied by that file.

    So far, the only one that I see extolling this software is the author.
    There are lots of download sites that have this software but their
    "review" is nothing more than them repeating what the software author
    told them to say. Considering who is the registrant for the iobit.com
    domain, I wouldn't bother with this software until many months have
    elapsed. After all, there isn't much need for it since you can
    scheduled periodic defrags using Task Scheduler.

    Any process that is running, especially one that consumes any data bus
    bandwidth, will have an impact on the responsiveness of your host even
    if it runs at low priority (and even if it has a bandwidth threshold
    setting). Why wouldn't you schedule the defrag for when YOU are not
    using the host? You can already do that. I see nothing but claimed
    speed for this product. It doesn't reposition the MFT, defrag the
    pagefile, or make any other claims. If you are using NTFS (there are
    a few good reasons why you should still use FAT) then defragging once
    a month is probably far more than sufficient for an end user's host.
    Since you can perform the defrag when you are not using the host, it
    is unimportant as to what priority at which it runs or how it impacts
    the responsiveness of your host.

    You really have a compelling or critical need to be an involuntary
    tester of beta software? Yeah, so it's free. That's an excuse for
    risking the stability and security of your OS setup and data files so
    you can help someone iron the wrinkles out of their software (who can
    then later decide to go commercial with it without ever recompensing
    you for your labors)? If you believe someone is pointing a gun at
    your head to beta test this software, do it within a virtual machine,
    or multiboot into a *test* install of Windows (and for which you have
    an image to do a full restore back to a baseline state).

    Oh, and do enjoy the Google-based advertisements in the beta product.
    They claim it is free. No, it isn't. The cost to you is having to
    run adware on your host. They are relying on enough boobs using their
    software to generate click-through revenue because those boobs went
    and bought something through the Google ads. It isn't freeware. It
    is adware (go read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adware or
    http://www.google.com/search?q=define:adware).


    For an example of the so-called atruism of the software author's web
    site (iobit.com), take a look at
    http://www.iobit.com/iobitsmartdefrag.html#. Why do you think there
    is that paragraph on that page? It is to draw users that perform web
    searches to their site. Hmm, apparently they also want users looking
    for "free porn movies|videos|clips", "Disneychannel.com", "Microsoft",
    "AVG", and "Limeware" to find their product's web site. Oh yeah, like
    that's a software author that I would trust ... not!

    You might also want to visit their forum
    (http://forums.iobit.com/forumdisplay.php?f=9) to note how others feel
    about their product (thankfully IE7Pro and my added URL blocks
    eliminates their intervening and interferring advertisements in their
    forum).
     
    VanguardLH, Jan 24, 2008
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. G. Morgan

    G. Morgan Guest

    VanguardLH wrote:

    >"G. Morgan" wrote in message
    >news:...
    >> IObit SmartDefrag Beta 4.03 is listed as the #1 download at
    >> http://www.majorgeeks.com/download.php?det=5318 . Has anyone
    >> experience with this defragger (good/bad)? Would you recommend it?

    >
    >
    >Be aware that constant defragging of your hard drive can render
    >useless any incremental backups of your hard drive which are image
    >backups. By moving the sectors around, you end up forcing your backup
    >software which is performing an image backup (not a file backup) to
    >perform a full backup. For example, if you use Acronis True Image
    >Home to save incremental *image* backups of your hard drive(s), and
    >after performing a defrag, they warn that the effect would force a
    >full image backup. That's why they don't recommend doing a defrag
    >until just before your scheduled full image backup. Logical file
    >backups would not be affected since it is unimportant and not recorded
    >as to which sectors were occupied by that file.


    That's good information. I'm first to admit I don't do backups as
    often as I should, and I have no set scheme to do so. I'm due for a
    Ghost snapshot right now.

    >So far, the only one that I see extolling this software is the author.
    >There are lots of download sites that have this software but their
    >"review" is nothing more than them repeating what the software author
    >told them to say. Considering who is the registrant for the iobit.com
    >domain, I wouldn't bother with this software until many months have
    >elapsed. After all, there isn't much need for it since you can
    >scheduled periodic defrags using Task Scheduler.


    OMG.. I just did a whois. I think this product may be contaminated
    with lead. You're right - no reviews from reputable sources.


    >
    >Any process that is running, especially one that consumes any data bus
    >bandwidth, will have an impact on the responsiveness of your host even
    >if it runs at low priority (and even if it has a bandwidth threshold
    >setting). Why wouldn't you schedule the defrag for when YOU are not
    >using the host? You can already do that. I see nothing but claimed
    >speed for this product. It doesn't reposition the MFT, defrag the
    >pagefile, or make any other claims. If you are using NTFS (there are
    >a few good reasons why you should still use FAT) then defragging once
    >a month is probably far more than sufficient for an end user's host.
    >Since you can perform the defrag when you are not using the host, it
    >is unimportant as to what priority at which it runs or how it impacts
    >the responsiveness of your host.


    More good information - thanks.


    >
    >You really have a compelling or critical need to be an involuntary
    >tester of beta software? Yeah, so it's free. That's an excuse for
    >risking the stability and security of your OS setup and data files so
    >you can help someone iron the wrinkles out of their software (who can
    >then later decide to go commercial with it without ever recompensing
    >you for your labors)? If you believe someone is pointing a gun at
    >your head to beta test this software, do it within a virtual machine,
    >or multiboot into a *test* install of Windows (and for which you have
    >an image to do a full restore back to a baseline state).


    I do not have any need to test someone's software for free, especially
    *this* type of software. That is why I asked before I even installed
    it, it has the potential to do too much damage.

    >Oh, and do enjoy the Google-based advertisements in the beta product.
    >They claim it is free. No, it isn't. The cost to you is having to
    >run adware on your host. They are relying on enough boobs using their
    >software to generate click-through revenue because those boobs went
    >and bought something through the Google ads. It isn't freeware. It
    >is adware (go read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adware or
    >http://www.google.com/search?q=define:adware).


    I didn't even notice that.

    >
    >
    >For an example of the so-called atruism of the software author's web
    >site (iobit.com), take a look at
    >http://www.iobit.com/iobitsmartdefrag.html#. Why do you think there
    >is that paragraph on that page? It is to draw users that perform web
    >searches to their site. Hmm, apparently they also want users looking
    >for "free porn movies|videos|clips", "Disneychannel.com", "Microsoft",
    >"AVG", and "Limeware" to find their product's web site. Oh yeah, like
    >that's a software author that I would trust ... not!


    Heh!

    >You might also want to visit their forum
    >(http://forums.iobit.com/forumdisplay.php?f=9) to note how others feel
    >about their product (thankfully IE7Pro and my added URL blocks
    >eliminates their intervening and interferring advertisements in their
    >forum).


    Looked around there for about five minutes and didn't like what I
    read.

    Thanks VanguardLH, that was a very thorough and informative reply. I
    certainly will NOT be installing this product. I appreciate your
    efforts.

    --

    -G
     
    G. Morgan, Jan 25, 2008
    #3
  4. G. Morgan

    chuckcar Guest

    G. Morgan <> wrote in
    news::

    > IObit SmartDefrag Beta 4.03 is listed as the #1 download at
    > http://www.majorgeeks.com/download.php?det=5318 . Has anyone
    > experience with this defragger (good/bad)? Would you recommend it?
    >
    > Thanks.
    >
    >


    The fact of the matter is that there is very little (if any at all) need
    to defragment your hard drive any more. Certainly if you use ntfs and
    even with fat32 the need is more than usurped by the need to not run
    anything in the background that slows your computer down. It has always
    been a truth that current software requires all the processing power of
    a current computer (esp. with games). Besides you are having your
    computer run for (possibly) hours and using (wasting) electricity when
    it could be used for the purpose you bought it. If you *really* want to
    defragment your hard drive, the one with windows works well enough and
    symantec is the company that originally wrote it, so that would be where
    to go to get a "better" one. The word better is in quotes because the
    only real improvement that could be made is where the tables for where
    the files are stored (the FAT in fat32) is. Optimally it would be at the
    begining of the drive where the directory is stored, but this only works
    if no files are added or deleted *ever* until it's defragmented again.
    Something that is not going to make for a very tenable situation.

    With NTFS (the above applies only to FAT32) the need is simply not
    there due to the fact that the organization is such that defragmenting
    is simply not necessary by design.

    --
    (setq (chuck nil) car(chuck) )
     
    chuckcar, Jan 25, 2008
    #4
    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. Ron P

    AOL Moz Beta

    Ron P, Dec 3, 2004, in forum: Firefox
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    484
    Ron P
    Dec 4, 2004
  2. Romila

    Beta 70-298 Beta Exam

    Romila, Sep 6, 2003, in forum: MCSE
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    629
    MCSE World
    Sep 8, 2003
  3. Luke Duke
    Replies:
    63
    Views:
    1,894
    POD {Ò¿Ó}
    Jan 11, 2008
  4. troutman
    Replies:
    10
    Views:
    2,225
    troutman
    Dec 21, 2008
  5. bardeban

    advance system care & Iobit security 360

    bardeban, Oct 12, 2009, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    460
    bardeban
    Oct 12, 2009
Loading...

Share This Page