Full Versus Quick

Lockergnomie Patrick Kingsley has a heap of help for those of us
who have ever faced a complete reinstallation of Windows 2000 or
XP: “Regarding the difference between a Quick and Full format…
the error check is only part of the overhead that occurs when you
perform a Full format; the other significant portion of the
overhead occurs as the block and sector structure is laid out and
written to the entire disk, which does not occur when you do a
Quick format. Basically, a Full format truly scrubs the disk from
scratch, rebuilds all of the file structures, and checks to make
sure that everything is copasetic. All a Quick format does is lay
down a blank FAT and directory table. This is why a brand-new
unformatted disk can't be Quick formatted and must receive a Full
format; it needs all of the file structures laid out first, so the
FAT actually has blocks and sectors to track, instead of a
nebulous mess (though, frankly, looking at my hard drive, it's not
all that different from a nebulous mess; it's just a properly
formatted and allocated nebulous mess).” I suppose that if you
have extra time on your hands, go for the Full option. It couldn't
hurt.

Optimize 3.0 is an excellent tool to have in your arsenal. Use it to clean up your computer, free up space by removing junk files, and to generally speed up your computer. You spend a lot of time using your machine... don't you want it to run at its optimum speed and efficiency?