Some important later bits of information for your particular case. You
said your servicer used the utility (after booting from CD) to relocate
your page file to the center of the disk. You also said your computer
only has 512MB of RAM. That's a very small amount of RAM for an XP
machine and means your computer is very heavily dependent on the page
file. Relocating the page file would not be possible with the system
running, not because of other workload but since the page file would be
in exclusive use by the system. Such a utility would not be allowed to
even open the file let alone write to it. If the reviewer has not
booted from the utility such relocations would not be possible in his
case. On the other hand if he had much more RAM than you do it would
also be much less important to his system.
I predict you will get even far, far better performance by spending at
least as much on RAM as on other utilities and services. As I
recommended to you buy as much as you are able up to 4GB or whatever
limit is imposed by your system design (see the user's manual for max
memory)
Chuck Norcutt
On 8/18/2012 7:19 AM, Brian Swale wrote:
> Chuck wrote
>
>> Brian says his
>> computer's performance has been significantly improved in the past so I'll
>> accept that it has. But I'll also add that the only review that I could
>> find of the same software pans it as useless and a waste of money.
>> Who knows? What I do know is that after running this machine for the
>
> My computer tech said
>> The defrag program is Paragon total defrag from a boot cd. The fact that
>> it deletes 2 windows files and then recreates them after the defrag and
>> places the page file in the centre of the disk is why the program makes a
>> difference to the speed.
>
> If I saw the same review as Chuck did, I wish to point out that (as I
> remember) the reason they marked it low was that Paragon do not
> recommend running their defrag program while you are using the computer
> for whatever you use a computer for. I found only one review.
>
> When I saw that I thought it was (and is) a pretty thick remark (or a remark
> made by a pretty thick person). There's NO way I would expect a computer
> to do such an intensive job as re-organising my important files while it was
> doing complicated maths, ... the risk of losing data could be too great.
>
> I also noted that the review did NOT comment on the quality of the defrag
> work ... which makes me suspect that they did not test it adequately.
>
> Consequently, and acknowledging the significant working experience of the
> guy I paid to "do" my machine (not for the first time for one reason or
> another) I hasten to add - I've been using him for about 30+ years - I
> panned their review as being worthless.
>
> Brian (One pan is as good as another when you're after gold) Swale ..
>
>
>
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|