The problem I have with comparing them is I have no idea how to compare. I know I can tell the difference in how fast they do the job, but how do I really compare how well they worked? Is the fast one faster because it does less?I have tried some defraggers but they havent had any kind of graphical representation, just a window that says the defrag is complete. I am assuming the one you speak of has, and I will certainly try it out. Again, though, there is no real way for me of knowing how well one has performed against the other is there, unless there is a major performance improvement with the computer? A pretty picture of everything looking good is not necessarily a good guide of whether it actually is, surely? And if it simply informs me .. defrag completed.. as many of them do, what can that tell me either?I suspect the defraggers which work on shutdown or bootup are probably more effective, simply because they can defrag files which are not normally accessible while windows is running. Does this difference actually mean anything though, in real terms, to the speed or reliability of my computer? Is there a point at which you have defragged sufficiently that any further would not gain any real benefit?I'll certainly try this one, and see if it makes any performance improvements, but if you have the answer to how I can tell one is better than the other (other than just taking their word for it), I'd be grateful to hear it. I know I can read reviews and suchlike on the net, but I'd prefer to hear real world experiences than bench tests.
Mitz from Tips4pc