DISKEEPER 7.0 Desktop/Work Station

What's it do?

Defragments the computer system's drive for better performance, purportedly better than the built-in defragmenter that comes with Windows.


Does it do what it promises?

Reviewer 1. Yes. I've put this application on several different machines, using 3 different operating systems (WinXP Home, WinXP Pro, and Win98se), and it's worked smoothly on each one. Main computer configurations were:

1) WinXP Home - AMD 1.4 Ghz, 384 Mb RAM, w/approximately 15 Gb used HDD space on a 40 Gb HDD. First defrag with Diskeeper took 93 minutes (much faster than using the built in defrag). Not exactly sure how long since this had been defragged, but I know it was over a month.

2) WinXP Pro - Pentium 4/1.6 Ghz, 512 Mb RAM, w/approximately 17 Gb used space on a 120 Gb HDD. First defrag w/Diskeeper took approx 2 hrs, and this one also had been without a defrag for about a month.

3) Win98se - AMD 1.4 Ghz, 256 Mb RAM, w/approximately 1.4 Gb used on a 10 Gb HDD. This showed 22 days since last defrag, and using Diskeeper, it only took 6 minutes!! Yes, I was impressed!!

4) Fresh load of miscellaneous software & WinXP Pro on Pentium 4/3 Ghz, 512 Mb RAM, 80 Gb HDD w/approx 10 Gb loaded - not yet defragged since load. Defrag w/Diskeeper took 31 minutes! (This is now my main machine for the rest of the review)

The only thing I wasn't really able to determine was a significant performance improvement, as the sales pitch states. However, if one hadn't been regularly defragging, I'm sure they'd see a marked improvement. But, you would with a 'regular' defrag also. So I have yet to really see enough evidence to support that statement.

Reviewer 2. Yes, it does analyze and defrag the hard drive or whatever source selected.

Reviewer 3. Yes.

Reviewer 4. Yes.

Reviewer 5. Yes, although I have to mention that the Frag guard does not run on my system. It freezes the computer every other minute. The Diskeeper help desk acknowledges that this is not common but has been seen before. They indicated that, if you set the Paging File Initial and Maximum sizes to the same value, the Paging File will not fragment and, if you keep at least 25% free space on your NFTS partitions and run Diskeeper at least daily, the MFTs should not fragment either. Then, you do not need Frag Guard in the first place. I achieved good results after an initial manual defragmentation and using Diskeeper in the automatic "Set it and forget it" mode, and installing/uninstalling several programs. I'd probably have gotten even better results if I'd scheduled Diskeeper to defragment in the background more often. It's set for "Smart scheduling" since I think it's what most users would do, which means I let Diskeeper decide how often to run, based on the actual fragmentation of the drive.

Reviewer 6. Yes, it defragments files speedily and completely.



WAS IT EASY TO INSTALL?

Reviewer 1. Very. I ran into no difficulties at all, and actually have uninstalled and reinstalled just to see how that went. Not a hitch. Install interface is very user-friendly also.

Reviewer 2. Yes.

Reviewer 3. Yes, I had no problem. The install was straightforward and simple.

Reviewer 4. There were no real issues with the install disk per se, but if you don't have Adobe Acrobat reader preinstalled, you will not be able to launch the included help files. I think Acrobat should have been included with the installation disk.

Executive Software, producers of Diskeeper, responded: We don't require Adobe Acrobat to view help files (at least not on Diskeeper Workstation or Server editions.)

Reviewer 5. No problem at all.

Reviewer 6. Effortless, smooth install, no problems.



Good Points?

Reviewer 1. I love the "set it & forget it" feature. I see it 'checking', and it doesn't seem to interfere with anything else you're doing. This is something I think is great, as I'm always doing maintenance on other's computers, and tend to neglect my own! I did play around with a manual defrag, and kept using the computer as it worked in the background. It still defragged in record time! I like the graphic interface. Yes, it's similar to the defrag graphics that come with WinXP etc, but is a bit easier to understand for the average user. The point of being able to continue using the computer during defrag is a big plus for me, too! If my computer's on, it's being used. It's hard for me to find time to do the maintenance that's so important. Now I can relax, forget it, and it monitors my system and does it for me.

Reviewer 2. The boot time defragmentation, which is only available on Windows NT/2000/XP versions of Diskeeper. Boot Time defragmentation consolidates directories into a single location, or to defragment the paging file or the master file table (MFT). This opens up larger areas of contiguous free space for new file creation and modification. I believe it has sped up my boot time, which is the time when the computer boots prior to the operating system taking control. I also like the "Set It and Forget It" feature, which allows Diskeeper to run automatically in the background while I work with other programs. It doesn't interfere with my work. On my office PC, I have the Windows built-in defrag program and it's skin and bones compared to Diskeeper v7.0.

Reviewer 3. Works in the background with the "set it and forget it" options to keep the disks running efficiently by keeping the files unfragmented. This is the best part of the utility. The defragger also works while the system is being used, so unlike some others, and you needn't do a "boot-time" run or shut down all programs before using it. It is quick, so in spite of how much CPU power it uses, it is finished before it becomes annoying.

Reviewer 4. The feature list has a few very useful options. Frag Guard keeps your MFT and Page file from getting out of whack. It's constantly cleaning and reorganizing your data to keep your computer running quickly.

This is most useful, for people with dynamic page files, as if yours is static (if both minimum and maximum are the same you will experience lock ups.) The Boot Time Defragmenting tool will start a complete system defrag before all the apps you normally run have loaded and before most of the windows services have started. This is by far the most useful of the features as it will defrag everything including the MFT and will include a CHKDSK (scandisk for Windows 9x users) prior to running the defrag, allowing for a safe defrag.

Reviewer 5. Speed of the initial manual defrag was significantly higher than that when using Windows default defrag; however, the strongest point in my opinion is the "Set it and forget it" feature. It allows the user to keep his hard drive virtually unfragmented and thus up to speed all the time, and it frees the user from the time-wasting process of regular manual defragmentation. "Set it and forget it" means Diskeeper either runs in the background at lowest priority, or while the screensaver is active. I don't notice any slowing of the system wile running Diskeeper in the background. While it may require a little tutorial reading before using it, Diskeeper has a comprehensive interface that most users will understand.

Reviewer 6. Very fast, much faster than Norton Utilities 2003, which I routinely use: 3 times faster4 than Norton, and that was Norton's results after having first run Diskeeper to defrag two hard drives. In addition to defragging, Norton also repositions files on the drive to reduce arm motion, useful but of substantially less benefit than the defragging. Outstanding, clean user interface design, simple well-identified tasks clearly presented, with excellent Results-Summary available on completion. I also particularly liked its "Smart Scheduling" feature, which schedules defrag runs more often when the fragmentation level increases. Excellent documentation, including not only effective how-to material but also a discussion of the technical aspects of how the program works. A very good value for the price, and good tech support plan (free for 90 days, nominal cost thereafter).



Weak Points?

Reviewer 1. I really haven't run across anything I'd call a weak point. As of yet, I've only had good results and I've really given this a workout!

Reviewer 2. Setting up the "set it and forget it" feature isn't quite as intuitive as it could be. If I wanted it to start an hour from the moment I set it, it won't do it until the next day. Its time is not set to my standard time. For instance, I am in Central Standard Time, but the clock shows Eastern Standard Time (8:00PM), but yet it runs at 7:40PM. Plus, the first few times, it didn't work and then I realized what I did wrong -- forgot to press the "SET" button. This program's user interface is not typical of what users have come to expect. It could use improvement in this area. It also took a bit of doing to figure out how to turn on Screen Saver Mode even with the Help file.

Reviewer 3. Doesn't allow for selecting which files go where on the disk. It would maintain a more efficient file system were it to do that. Keeping executables in the front on operating system partitions, for example, would make the system run faster by reducing disk seek time. Other partitions might benefit by getting other file types at the beginning, and others at the end, to improve access time there. Although Diskeeper does seem to unify the swapfile when a minimum size is set, it does not put it at the beginning of the disk partition. As the swapfile is a critical component of the virtual memory system, performance is greatly enhanced when seeks are kept to a minimum. Keeping the swapfile as close as possible to the FAT(32) or NTFS tables, therefore, is the single-most important function, outside of defragmenting the files, that a defragmentation tool can do.

Executive Software, producers of Diskeeper, responded: Reviewer does not seem to completely understand the File Systems and how they work or how they access files. He believes that Diskeeper needs to move files to certain locations on the disk. See "'Optimization' Is Not A Solution" in the NSTL White Paper at http://www.executive.com/diskeeper/diskeeper.asp. When files are accessed on a volume, one must first go to the "index" table to locate it (FAT table or Master File Table). On NTFS then, one must navigate through the directory structure before finally ending up at the file. Placing all executables on one location would not only "not help" but would be more likely to be counterproductive.

Reviewer 4. Unfortunately, Frag Guard. The inability for it to run on a system with a static page file is something that should be looked at, or at least mentioned in the option page so the user is aware of options when setting it up. The Help guide is not in a format everyone can use as a .pdf file for Acrobat Reader. If the user does not have Acrobat, he must endure a 9 mb download, not good if he is using a dial up account.

Reviewer 5. Frag Guard is failing on my system and some others as well.

Reviewer 6. Complexity of product offerings: they have Server, Workstation, and Home-User versions with a generous amount of documentation about each, but nowhere did I discover a succinct side-by-side comparison. Having noticed on their Website a "Build 428", I had to guess whether to download the update for the Workstation or Home-User versions, which I wound up not installing because I could not figure out which our evaluation copy was. If I were managing this product, I'd be worrying about whether it's trying to cover too many user groups within a single program framework. As much as I appreciate detailed documentation (and almost never get it these days), I had the distinct feeling that "less" would have been "more" with Diskeeper. Layering into two tiers - overview/detail - would have been much more effective. I found navigation if its Website unintuitive, sometimes even difficult.



Other Comments?

Reviewer 1. I ran a test of 2 nearly identical machines - Both AMD 1.4 Ghz, WinXP Home, 384 Mb RAM, with nearly the same used HDD space, and approx the same time since last defrag. We started the defrag at the same time, one running Diskeeper Pro, one using defrag from within Windows. By the time the one using Diskeeper had finished, the other machine was only at 19%. I think this is a pretty good indicator of the efficiency of the program!

Reviewer 2. None. It's a great utility program that keeps things simple to ensure computer users of all levels that we can do it.

Reviewer 3. Whether using Diskeeper or another defragmentation tool, it is important to keep disks as defragmented as possible to maintain efficiency and smooth system operation. Diskeeper is as good as another for that purpose and, all else being equal, it will do the job adequately. As far as I could find, Diskeeper was the only available tool to work on an NTFS partition, so it has seniority in that arena.

Reviewer 4. For those unaware, Diskeeper is a full version of the built-in defrag tool that ships with Windows 2000 and XP. Trying to measure the speed at which this application works against the built-in Windows or Norton version is useless, and not as revealing as many would think. Norton does not touch the MFT or Page File during computer usage (as of Norton 2003) and its boot time defrag allows more services to load than Diskeeper does. If people are buying this application, the purchase should be based on quality of the defrag, not the speed. This type application is useful only if it actually works, and this one does work.

Reviewer 5. Probably good value for the money and over time it'll save you countless hours.

Reviewer 6. A mature, excellent designed program with specific function and market focus, at an attractive price. I really liked and respect this program, one of the best I've seen as a member of this Review Panel. The post-defrag report and its level of detail I found quite useful. The ability to analyze or defragment disk volumes independently of each other was also quite a good design feature.



Will you continue to use it?

Reviewer 1. Most definitely.

Reviewer 2. Yes.

Reviewer 3. From time to time, perhaps. I have several options for defragmenting, but I find Norton to be the best for my purposes.

Reviewer 4. I will. It's far more full-featured than its baby cousin, the Windows built-in defrag tool. It's set up and forget it are a godsend to those of us with short memories and bad habits regarding computer maintenance.

Reviewer 5. Most certainly.

Reviewer 6. Yes, I will definitely continue to use it and recommend it to my clients.

Back