Existing users, 
Anyone who's spent time in Apple Support Discussions will quickly wonder -
what is the need for iDefrag? I've lost count of the times I've seen the assurance that OS 10.2 and above DO NOT NEED DEFRAGING (if Journaling is enabled). In fact, there are an equal number of warnings against defragging the current Apple drives.
In the face of these facts, I'm not about to try iDefrag, and my copy of Micromat's Drive 10 remains safely stored away in my desk drawer.
I'm no expert -- just reporting what I've observed time after time over the past year. Anyone have a response to this?
iDefrag
Defragmentation & disk optimization.
Version: 1.7.1
iDfrag - needed?
Feedback Type: Commentary
Contributed by: Macsure Friday, December 24 2004 @ 12:12 PM PST
Product Platform: MacOSX
Used Product For: Have Not Tried
Recommend Product: NO
Comments
iDfrag - needed? - Soul of Wit
The dreaded 20MB fragment. Ooh, the horror.Not needed. Really not needed for $30.
Skip it.
Really.
Tuesday, December 28 2004 @ 09:24 AM PST
iDfrag - needed? - HumanMedia
File defragging is not the real issue, its disk defragging. Having a file defragged only helps when reading that particular file, but having the disk defragged reduces startup time (by grouping the OS files together to reduce having the disk seek all over the place) and any operations which use a disk cache constantly like PhotoShop.I cant vouch for this utility but using Nortons with a custom built OSX profile reduces startup time by 30% and stops photoshop seeking like crazy when working on large files.
Forget this "OSX does file defragging on <20mb files" as it is only the smallest most irrelevant part of the overall defragging issue. Think about it.
Tuesday, December 28 2004 @ 04:02 PM PST
iDfrag - needed? - Macsure
Your point is accurate. But did you know that Apple technicians still recommend that even disk fragments not be removed? I learned this recently - the explanation is that defragging utilities can "accidentally" over-write the "hot zone" on the disk - where certain essental files are kept.I agree also with your statement about optimizing to keep PhotoShop from not going crazy, slowing down. But for the average user, the risk must be balanced against the advantage. For those who really need PhotoShop running at top speed all the time, the priority is clearly in favor of disk defragging.
Saturday, March 19 2005 @ 05:16 PM PST
iDfrag - needed? - skyo63
os x has limited defragging (optimizing) capabilities, however fragments larger than 20 MB will be left untouched. Also, newly installed or modified files can still be allocated all over the partition or disk. Try and have Drive 10 or any other defrag tool analyze your main disk, even after a "complete optimization" by os x, and you'll probably see what I mean. With ever growing complexity of apps and databases and also disk size, your drive's perceived performance is liable to suffer if your files are widely dispersed. Just my thoughts.Reply to This
Saturday, December 25 2004 @ 03:52 AM PST