🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1992Aug17.185732.7819@cucbs.chem.columbia.edu> pollard@cucbs.chem.columbia.edu (Tom Pollard) writes:
>gukgn@uniwa.uwa.edu.au (Kim Guan Ng) writes:
>>I currently have Norton Filesaver installed on my Mac and am considering
>>buying Autodoubler as I am running out of HD space (who isn't :-) ).
>>However, I remember glancing through articles fairly recently saying
>>that AD slows down any machine which needs to frequently write temporary
>>files such as Filesaver. Is this true, because if the slowdown is great,
>>I may want to reconsider buying AD (or give up Filesaver).

The problem here is not so much the slow down, but the fact that
FileSaver is rendered ineffective by programs that generate lots of
temp files. This is because file recovery utilities keep a record of
only the most recently deleted files. 

Consider the case in which you delete file x, after which AD runs,
creating and erasing enough temp files so that x is no longer on the
recovery list. When you notice that you deleted x in error, and try to
recover it, you are out of luck.

Not that for similar reasons running a disk optimizer (such as
Disk Express) makes file recovery much less reliable. This is because
the sectors used by the file to be recovered might have been reused in
the optimization process, overwriting the original data.

In short: It is probably a waste of resources running a file recovery
utility, a defragmenter, and a compressor all at once in the
background.

Edgar Knapp