When I use Norton Speeddisk 2003, after defragging I still have red blocks
scattered all over the place, marked as "unmovable". Why is this? (I have
added the swapfile in the list to put first).


--
regards,

|\ /|
| \/ |@rk
\../
\/os

The red blocks are used by Windows system files. You cannot move them, to
do so will render them unstable.

Having said that though, some of the red blocks you see are also lost
clusters which aren't movable.

--
R Green
Tech Support
----------------------
WoWsat.com
----------------------

"Linea Recta" <mccm.vos-spamtrap-@hccnet.nl> wrote in message
news:bq0li9$1sg4rn$(E-Mail Removed)...
> When I use Norton Speeddisk 2003, after defragging I still have red blocks
> scattered all over the place, marked as "unmovable". Why is this? (I have
> added the swapfile in the list to put first).
>
>
> --
> regards,
>
> |\ /|
> | \/ |@rk
> \../
> \/os
>
>

You can visit Systernals and download their PageDefrag tool, here's the page:
http://www.sysinternals.com/ntw2k/fr...gedefrag.shtml

You can also use other defrag tools like Diskeeper or PerfectDisk that will do a
more complete job.

On Tue, 25 Nov 2003 22:42:26 +0100, "Linea Recta" <mccm.vos-spamtrap-@hccnet.nl>
wrote:

>When I use Norton Speeddisk 2003, after defragging I still have red blocks
>scattered all over the place, marked as "unmovable". Why is this? (I have
>added the swapfile in the list to put first).

What I really meant was, that I can't imagine any good reason why any file
couldn't be moved to another location on the hard disk without affecting its
functionality.


--
regards,

|\ /|
| \/ |@rk
\../
\/os



"R Green - WoWsat.com" <news@***wowsat.com> schreef in bericht
news:h1Xwb.23960$oN2.10926@edtnps84...
> The red blocks are used by Windows system files. You cannot move them, to
> do so will render them unstable.
>
> Having said that though, some of the red blocks you see are also lost
> clusters which aren't movable.
>
> --
> R Green
> Tech Support
> ----------------------
> WoWsat.com
> ----------------------
>
> "Linea Recta" <mccm.vos-spamtrap-@hccnet.nl> wrote in message
> news:bq0li9$1sg4rn$(E-Mail Removed)...
> > When I use Norton Speeddisk 2003, after defragging I still have red
blocks
> > scattered all over the place, marked as "unmovable". Why is this? (I
have
> > added the swapfile in the list to put first).
> >
> >
> > --
> > regards,
> >
> > |\ /|
> > | \/ |@rk
> > \../
> > \/os
> >
> >
>
>

Thanks, I'll have a look into it. So these files ARE movable after all? What
strange issue...


--
regards,

|\ /|
| \/ |@rk
\../
\/os


<(E-Mail Removed)> schreef in bericht
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> You can visit Systernals and download their PageDefrag tool, here's the
page:
> http://www.sysinternals.com/ntw2k/fr...gedefrag.shtml
>
> You can also use other defrag tools like Diskeeper or PerfectDisk that
will do a
> more complete job.
>
> On Tue, 25 Nov 2003 22:42:26 +0100, "Linea Recta"
<mccm.vos-spamtrap-@hccnet.nl>
> wrote:
>
> >When I use Norton Speeddisk 2003, after defragging I still have red
blocks
> >scattered all over the place, marked as "unmovable". Why is this? (I have
> >added the swapfile in the list to put first).
>

Linea Recta wrote:
> What I really meant was, that I can't imagine any good reason why any file
> couldn't be moved to another location on the hard disk without affecting its
> functionality.

Yes and no. Disk Defragmenter is overly cautious about moving system
files, based on the idea "better safe than sorry".

[This followup was posted to alt.os.windows2000 and a copy was sent to the
cited author.]

In article <bq2e8v$1tl76t$(E-Mail Removed)>, mccm.vos-
spamtrap-@hccnet.nl says...
> Thanks, I'll have a look into it. So these files ARE movable after all? What
> strange issue...

Some files are always in use while Windows is normally running.
Diskeeper has a boot-time defragmentation routine that can defrag the MFT
and pagefile during bootup, before most of Windows is loaded. For Win2K,
this during that screen with the bar on the bottom. A text screen will pop
up with the running program. If you've ever had CHKDSK run on bootup, it's
like that.

Speedisk used to use it's own driver, but Symantec, probably prodded by
Microsoft, dumped that and now it uses the standard Windows API.

--
If there is a no_junk in my address, please REMOVE it before replying!
All junk mail senders will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the
law!!
http://home.att.net/~andyross

> Speedisk used to use it's own driver, but Symantec, probably prodded by
> Microsoft, dumped that and now it uses the standard Windows API.

As part of the usual saying for software: "If it works, take it out" ?

In article <3fc54b0d$0$12681$(E-Mail Removed)>, chris17
_(E-Mail Removed) says...
> > Speedisk used to use it's own driver, but Symantec, probably prodded by
> > Microsoft, dumped that and now it uses the standard Windows API.
>
> As part of the usual saying for software: "If it works, take it out" ?

The issue is the fact that MS occasionally makes changes to the NTFS
format. It's risky to bypass Windows to make changes.

--
If there is a no_junk in my address, please REMOVE it before replying!
All junk mail senders will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the
law!!
http://home.att.net/~andyross

"Andrew Rossmann" <andysnewsreply@no_junk.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> In article <3fc54b0d$0$12681$(E-Mail Removed)>, chris17
> _(E-Mail Removed) says...
> > > Speedisk used to use it's own driver, but Symantec, probably prodded
by
> > > Microsoft, dumped that and now it uses the standard Windows API.
> >
> > As part of the usual saying for software: "If it works, take it out" ?
>
> The issue is the fact that MS occasionally makes changes to the NTFS
> format. It's risky to bypass Windows to make changes.

isnt it risky running windows full stop ? :-P

alan

-- linux rules