Talk:O&O Defrag

This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Computing: Software

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Software.
	This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool as Stub-class because it uses a stub template. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the `\|auto=` parameter.

Advert Tag

I'm removing this advert tag because it placed by an IP, not a registered user, and The article doesn't seem like an advertisement, especially with the Known Issues section. If a mod would like to re-tag it, please list some specific items you don't agree with.--Ummel (talk) 22:53, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This article is a blatant advertisement maintained by the software publisher. I will make sure this nonsense stops, since you are either a confederate or terribly naive. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 219.86.50.247 (talk) 02:08, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'm experienced enough to know to log in before commenting, and how to sign my posts. Regardless, what is wrong with this article? How can someone write an article about a program without listing its features? There is a 'known issues' section, so I do not see what the hassle is about. I said to list specifics or fix them and you have failed to do so. You just talk about how "it is so obvious" with no proof. Maybe you're the phony, because I work in the healthcare industry. Ummel (talk) 23:03, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD

Before you mark this article for deletion, please note that O&O Defrag is often reviewed along with other notable defrag software in reputable, independent PC magazines. Some (but not all) of these articles are listed.

Not all of the extensive reviews are available online, but appeared in print. The sources have not been listed because they could not be verified yet. RitaSkeeter 06:33, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Here is the translation of a review in ComputerBild magazine

Saving files to the hard disk belongs to the most important tasks a computer carries out but at the same time slows a computer down over time. That is because Windows doesn’t always save files in one piece but fragmented. The parts of a file are dispersed over the hard disk. When the file is requested, all the individual pieces must first be packed back together on the hard disk. This cuts computer speed dramatically. Does “Defrag 10 Professional” bring speed and life back to a PC? COMPUTERBILD put it to the test:

Speed: COMPUTERBILD used two totally different fragmented hard disks during testing. One of them was relatively tidy, meaning O&O Defrag only had to re-sort small files. The software had absolutely no problem here, and after just 45 minutes had tidied up 45 Gigabytes of data.

Pure chaos reigned on the second disk. Windows had dispersed large film files onto all corners of the volume. The software once again tidied up this mess, thoroughly but also much slower. In both cases the procedure made the PC noticeably quicker.

Configuration and functions: The Software defragments internal and external hard disks. When required, the program also checks the volume for errors before the big clean-up. A major plus: the clean-up procedure can be scheduled for a certain time, or can be carried out when the PC is normally idle.

Operation: Operation is child’s play. An “Assistant for optimizing your system performance” automatically selects the correct settings. If so required, the defragmentation itself runs in the background so that the user barely notices. All the other settings are also clearly laid out and easy to understand. For instance, should the program be required to check whether a defragmentation is actually worthwhile, this procedure is achieved in just a few simple steps.

Conclusion: "Defrag 10" took the number one spot in the COMPUTERBILD chart with an almost flawless test result. The Software achieves order and makes tired PCs lively again.

Test results at a glance: Speed: 2.44, Configuration and functions: 1.10, Operation: 1.47, Service: 1.99

COMPUTERBILD test result: Good 2.10
Value for money: Good value for money

--Donn Edwards 12:45, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Known issues

"Directories and file metadata are not defragmented":

Depends. In online-mode (standard), O&O defrags and consolidates any non-exclusive-locked files by the OS. With NTFS volumes, these are only a handful files ($MFTMirr, $LogFile, pagefile.sys, hiberfil.sys etc.); at FAT volumes however, all directories are also locked and therefore can't be moved. Running in offline-mode (in the Windows start-up phase), O&O can also move those locked files (i.e. defragmenting the pagefile), but it uses a fast-mode (possible the Stealth-method from the online-mode), so it just defrags the files but does not consolidate free space (so FAT-directories aren't moved anyway, sticking to wherever they were at the volume).

From the Help file: This phase is called Boot time defragmentation.

It is now possible, using this feature, to defragment a file which is being used exclusively by the operating system. Depending on the operating system, for example, this can be the swap file, the registration database as well as the MFT (Master File Table). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Niraya (talk • contribs) 05:21, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"There is no way to limit the defragmentation degree.":

And yes, O&O defrags all files regardless the number of fragments, there is no option to limit this - only to manually exclude files from defragmenting. But what's the point anyway, it's a defragmentation program after all, so it defragments even those files. Xoleras (talk) 16:35, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There are few, if any, defragmenters which consider files consisting of only huge fragments "good enough." Calling this a "known issue" might give that aspect a bit of undue weight. 217.254.168.16 (talk) 06:25, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This article is not merely self-promotion; it is NOTHING but a product information page. Tell me, is it ok if I post all my software titles here, too? I'm not sure why the author of O&O thinks he is entitled to free product promotion at Wikipedia, but I personally will put a stop to this BS. Electronic Arts tried to pull the same crap and it backfired. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 219.86.50.247 (talk) 02:20, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As long as it is product information, I'm fine with it. If it's verifiable and reliably sourced, keep it. Just keep the marketing words like "innovative" or "unparalleled" out of the article. And yes, any honest product information is reliable, for the competition would have sued O&O if they lied. 217.254.168.16 (talk) 06:25, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've bought this product some days ago and now found this wiki page. In my opinion the "Known problems" section is somewhat biased.. There is no source for any of these pretences. Please excuse me but if this represents the "quality" standard of the english wikipedia.. omg --77.185.2.124 (talk) 20:47, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"O&O technical support is somewhere between abysmal and non-existent, and the company is unresponsive to problems when contacted by email."

I want to comment on our responsiveness to technical support issues: we *always* respond to any inquiry. I would like to investigate this further in our company, so please provide some more info on that. You can leave it on my user page, if you like, or post it here. Please note: I am MD and Co-Founder of O&O. --Olaf Kehrer (talk) 14:11, 16 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Zone Filing: Any good?

Still, even at wikipedia, there is no provement if this new "Zone Filing" technology gives any advantage over regular defragment methods. Thus, mentioning it sound more like an advert. I suppose, this page really lacks a critic review on "Zone Filing" efficiency. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.243.187.71 (talk) 14:44, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia does not conduct original research. Don't expect Wikipedia to "prove" anything, we can only claim what's covered in other sources. -- intgr [talk] 14:47, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Lacks a review of the zone filing? It lacks a MENTION of it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.206.155.210 (talk) 23:46, 4 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Known issues needs NPOV cleanup and more.

The Known Issues needs editing, a lot, for NPOV. What version(s) were those written about? Current version is 14.5.543 As of version 12, it would grab hold of removable drives, blocking Windows from being able to safely remove or eject them. Far as I could find there was no way to restrict its automatic actions to non-removable drives. Bizzybody (talk) 19:54, 20 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]