Automatic defragmentation is great, but only third party defraggers seem to have got it right.
Ideally, autodefrag should run with minimal resource consumption, but produce results within a reasonable amount of time if the system is not busy all the time. In that case, an autodefragger beats manual and scheduled defraggers because its an 'always-on' process that gives consistent results constantly and with maximum efficiency. No downtime required, no messing with schedules and the like.
There is really no benefit to micromanaging system maintenance routines manually if the software is intelligent enough to manage it automatically without hassling the user for attention. But Microsoft's execution of this brilliant idea for it's Vista defrag was less than good.
Ideally, autodefrag should run with minimal resource consumption, but produce results within a reasonable amount of time if the system is not busy all the time. In that case, an autodefragger beats manual and scheduled defraggers because its an 'always-on' process that gives consistent results constantly and with maximum efficiency. No downtime required, no messing with schedules and the like.
There is really no benefit to micromanaging system maintenance routines manually if the software is intelligent enough to manage it automatically without hassling the user for attention. But Microsoft's execution of this brilliant idea for it's Vista defrag was less than good.
