Disk defragmenter

[Alan316]

The more i use vista, the more i feel dissappointed. Why the disk
defragmenter interface is so simple? I can never see how many percentage of
disk is fragmented, do i need to perform defragmentation, and the current
status of defragmentation. I can only wait......till it finish without
knowing what happen. Is this true?


Some guy told me, " I am looking forward to the next version of Windows to
see what is "different" - not what is the same!"

Are we expecting a better usability os or a jsut a different os? just to
change for the sake of change.
Is it very difficult for microsoft to maintain those simple advantages of
xp?

 

[D. Eth]

The more i use vista, the more i feel dissappointed. Why the disk
defragmenter interface is so simple? I can never see how many percentage
of
disk is fragmented, do i need to perform defragmentation, and the current
status of defragmentation. I can only wait......till it finish without
knowing what happen. Is this true?


Some guy told me, " I am looking forward to the next version of Windows to
see what is "different" - not what is the same!"

Are we expecting a better usability os or a jsut a different os? just to
change for the sake of change.
Is it very difficult for microsoft to maintain those simple advantages of
xp?

Uggg.
I see you, greeter of WalMart !

LOL

 

[Alan316]

if u like to play a fool, go else where

Uggg.
I see you, greeter of WalMart !

LOL

 

[Paul Montgomery]

Hello Alan,

I believe microsoft thought many people would see it as a standard
maintenance task, and would prefer it to run in the background so they
could continue to use their machines.

If you prefer a defragger you can watch, you may like the free one from
Auslogics

I've tried that one and it's good. Better than JKDefrag.

Here's an even better (and NEW) one: freeware Diskeeper-type that can
be run manually so one can look at all the pretty little boxes and
progress bar, or it can run in the background like Diskeeper.

http://downloads.zdnet.com/abstract.aspx?docid=386109

 

[ray]

The more i use vista, the more i feel dissappointed. Why the disk
defragmenter interface is so simple? I can never see how many percentage
of disk is fragmented, do i need to perform defragmentation, and the
current status of defragmentation. I can only wait......till it finish
without knowing what happen. Is this true?


Some guy told me, " I am looking forward to the next version of Windows
to see what is "different" - not what is the same!"

Are we expecting a better usability os or a jsut a different os? just to
change for the sake of change.
Is it very difficult for microsoft to maintain those simple advantages
of xp?

With a modern file system, of course, you would not even need a disk
defragmenter - this IS the 21st century. *nix has done quite nicely
without them for over 10 years now.

 

[_CragTheCode]

Yea, ther tot this is chat room

if u like to play a fool, go else where

 

[_CragTheCode]

Some guy told me, " I am looking forward to the next version of Windows

With a modern file system, of course, you would not even need a disk
defragmenter - this IS the 21st century. *nix has done quite nicely
without them for over 10 years now.

Really?? Then why each time it run, message pop up said this may take from a
few minutes to a few hour?

 

[Poutnik]

On Mon, 06 Oct 2008 09:36:42 +0800, Alan316 wrote:


With a modern file system, of course, you would not even need a disk
defragmenter - this IS the 21st century. *nix has done quite nicely
without them for over 10 years now.

interesting is, that ext4 FS includes deftagmentation tool.....

 

[Kayman]

The more i use vista, the more i feel dissappointed. Why the disk
defragmenter interface is so simple? I can never see how many percentage of
disk is fragmented, do i need to perform defragmentation, and the current
status of defragmentation. I can only wait......till it finish without
knowing what happen. Is this true?


Some guy told me, " I am looking forward to the next version of Windows to
see what is "different" - not what is the same!"

Are we expecting a better usability os or a jsut a different os? just to
change for the sake of change.
Is it very difficult for microsoft to maintain those simple advantages of
xp?

Interesting stuff...defrag etc. etc.
https://ms.istreamplanet.com/springboard/

 

[ray]

Really?? Then why each time it run, message pop up said this may take
from a few minutes to a few hour?

Certain Linux file systems do a consistency check when they boot up. This
most likely happens with unjournaled systems like ext2. It is not doing a
defrag, it is doing a consistency check. This issue has been completely
avoided with newer systems like reiser - does not have that issue at al.

 

[+Bob+]

With a modern file system, of course, you would not even need a disk
defragmenter - this IS the 21st century. *nix has done quite nicely
without them for over 10 years now.

Actually, MS has been telling us since NTFS came out that you don't
need to defrag.

It hasn't been true, but that's what they've been telling us

 

[Poutnik]

Certain Linux file systems do a consistency check when they boot up. This
most likely happens with unjournaled systems like ext2. It is not doing a
defrag, it is doing a consistency check. This issue has been completely
avoided with newer systems like reiser - does not have that issue at al.

This article is also quite interesting...

Measuring fragmentation of ext3 in linux
http://www2.lut.fi/~ilonen/ext3_fragmentation.html

Wikipedia - ext3 - Disadvantages - Defragmentation
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ext3#Defragmentation

Not to initiate flame, just to point out that
all analyzed items ( e.g. OSs ) need
the same level of criticism approach.

Am I critical to my "favorite" at same level as to my "enemy" ?

note that I confess I do not know much about advanced *nic systems,
but I am persuaded they are superior at least in performance.

 

[Jim]

Just out of curiosity, how often should you run disk defrag? Do i need
to update it?

Up to you when you run it ; defrag progs do not need updating .