Full comparison of defragment software?

[toke lahti]

Has anybody seen any comparison between the most known defragmentation software for OsX?
Anything missing from the list: iDefrag, Stellar, TechtoolPro, DiscWarrior, DriveGenius, SpeedTools, DiskToolsPro?

 

[SHADO]

I'm not sure what your needs are, but DiskWarrior and Drive Genius are the most widely known, and for good reasons.

 

[Fishrrman]

iDefrag probably offers the most options and controls.

I've also used DriveGenius, and although it's more "basic" (essentially no options for "customization"), it works well enough.

 

[davidlv]

I'm not sure what your needs are, but DiskWarrior and Drive Genius are the most widely known, and for good reasons.

Since when is Disk Warrior "defragmentation software?" As far as I know, DW repairs the directory, the most common cause of disk issues, and it does a superior job at that, making it the first choice disk repair utility of many professionals. The new optimized directory is defragmented, but there may be file fragmentation on the disk even after replacing the directory with the new optimized directory DW makes. As such it is not really ™defragmentation software."

 

[toke lahti]

Ok, I guess DW is out then.
Has anybody compared the speed and thoroughness of these?
Would be pretty simple with right resources; long used system drive from power user's mac, clone it to 7 hdd's, take time and check how unfragmented the drive is after the job.

 

[kRobbin]

Has anybody noticed a sizable performance improvement after running a defragmentation utility? I've tried a few times and haven't noticed a difference. Seeing as it can take several hours to run, it just doesn't seem worth it.

Is there a utility that can measure performance before and after?

Thanks

 

[Matthew Yohe]

Has anybody noticed a sizable performance improvement after running a defragmentation utility? I've tried a few times and haven't noticed a difference. Seeing as it can take several hours to run, it just doesn't seem worth it.

Is there a utility that can measure performance before and after?

Thanks

Yeah, it's not worth it on the Mac because the file system does it automatically.

 

[toke lahti]

Yeah, it's not worth it on the Mac because the file system does it automatically.

It does it automatically only for files smaller than 20MB AND less than 8 fragments.
So, it really depends on how you use your computer.
If you have (1) lots of big files,
(2) disks pretty full from time to time and
(3) need the maximum speed from your system,
then you benefit from defragmenting software.
If your usage does not meet all of those, then you might not notice any difference.

 

[interrobang]

If you have (1) lots of big files,

Your money would probably be spent better on a second drive to keep those files on

(2) disks pretty full from time to time

Your money would probably be better spent on a second drive

(3) need the maximum speed from your system

You probably would be better off using your system instead of letting it sit idle while it defrags.

Defragging is a good way for people to feel like they're doing something good for their computer. It's like putting a big wing spoiler on a front-wheel drive car: it looks impressive, but it's the wrong solution to the wrong problem

 

[Matthew Yohe]

It does it automatically only for files smaller than 20MB AND less than 8 fragments.

You're quoting a document from 2004.

 

[toke lahti]

You're quoting a document from 2004.

Sad thing here is that HFS+ has been the same since 1998...

 

[MisterMe]

Sad thing here is that HFS+ has been the same since 1998...

Sad, but not true. Since 1998, HFS+ has been updated to include optional journaling. It has also been updated to include optional case-sensitivity.

But let us pretend that the statement is true for the balance of this post. This thread is about file fragmentation and defragmentation utilities. I was a Mac user in 1998. Back then, I defragged my Macs' hard drives. I can state without equivocation that it was a waste of time and money. Because MacOS X automatically defrags your hard drive, commercial defragging software is even more useless today.

Currently, this forum has several active threads about file fragmentation. The picture that is emerging is that users with filled hard drive capacity in excess of 90% are looking to defrag utilities to make-up for their lack of hard drive free space. This is like going to the dentist because your back itches. If you have less than 15% free space on your boot hard drive partition, then you need to increase the free space on your hard drive boot partition, period.

 

[Gregg2]

Has anybody noticed a sizable performance improvement after running a defragmentation utility?

I run TTP from time to time. No noticeable difference in performance.

Yeah, it's not worth it on the Mac because the file system does it automatically.

TTP disagrees with that statement. I check it about once a month, run it maybe every third time. It finds fragmented files.

However, Apple says defragmenting is not necessary.

 

[toke lahti]

Sad, but not true. Since 1998, HFS+ has been updated to include optional journaling. It has also been updated to include optional case-sensitivity.

Neither of those affected "automatic" defragmenting, which, AFAIK, hasn't changed since 1998.
Pretty surprising if you consider that hdd's are 100x bigger now than in 1998, but maybe we'll have refresh in Lion...

 

[Consultant]

Pointless now for 99% of users.

Even more pointless (actually detrimental) for SSD users.

 

[toke lahti]

Pointless now for 99% of users.
Even more pointless (actually detrimental) for SSD users.

Maybe so, but have you guys seen this:
http://osxbook.com/software/hfsdebug/fragmentation.html

 

[MisterMe]

Maybe so, but have you guys seen this:
http://osxbook.com/software/hfsdebug/fragmentation.html

I presume that you read the conclusion? It confirms what Consultant and I told you.

 

[toke lahti]

I presume that you read the conclusion? It confirms what Consultant and I told you.

Maybe you should read it a bit more carefully?

"Note that I do not intend to make any claims regarding the fragmentation-resistance of HFS+. I have sampled too few a volume to generalize my "results". This discussion is more illustrative than empirical, wherein I am only suggesting a tool/method that you could use to gauge your own volumes' situation."

No hdd's used for video editing were tested.
Maybe 90% does not need defrag, but I'm not sure about 99%...
Your guess is as good as mine.