Is this information correct?

[Clem]

We received the following at our job from the computer
administrator, is this correct?

"In recent day's I have been asked numerous times how to
defrag and scandisk PC's with Windows XP and not having
administrative rights. Well I have wonderful new for
those of you with this operating system, you don't have
to. Below you can read and exert from Microsoft
regarding defragging and Windows XP machines.



Defrag Regularly



DOS and non-NT versions of Windows do very little to keep
their file systems optimized. Huge gaps of free space
open up in various areas of the hard drive as programs
and files are installed and removed; later, other files
are written starting at the first block of free space,
filling the gaps in order by sector and ending up
scattered in pieces all over the drive. When an operating
system has to access several different areas of a hard
disk just to load a single file or program, performance
is severely degraded.



NT kernel operating systems, like Windows XP, take
measures when used with the NTFS file system to keep hard
disks contiguous--but fragmentation still does occur.
Therefore, you should defrag your XP hard disk(s) on a
regular basis depending on how much file juggling you do
on your PC.



If you install and remove programs frequently, you should
defrag the drive as often as once per week. If, however,
you tend to use the same applications for long periods of
time and you don't move files around, you can get away
with defragging your drives.



Since we don't install and uninstalled software of these
machine on a regular basis and we tend to use the same
software on a daily basis, we fall into the portion that
can get away with defragging our systems. I hope this
gives you' all a little more insight on your computers,
if you should have any question please feel free to
contact me.



Thank you,"

Any response would be appreaciated.
Thank you,
Clem

 

[Kent W. England [MVP]]

It is syntactically incorrect, rendering it difficult to determine if it
is semantically correct.

 

[Harry Ohrn]

--

Harry Ohrn MS-MVP [Shell\User]
www.webtree.ca/windowsxp

 

[Mad Max]

Yeah, what Kent said ! I think ?
Mad Max

It is syntactically incorrect, rendering it difficult to determine if it
is semantically correct.

 

[clem]

Mr. Kent W.,

I don't understand what you have written? Could you
please expand and explain your answer?
Thank you,
Clem

 

[_ _ J]

| It is syntactically incorrect

"In recent day's (sic : days)
defrag and scandisk PC's (sic : Chkdsk PCs)
Well (sic : ,) I have wonderful new (sic : news)
read and exert (sic : an exerpt)

with (sic : with *not*) defragging your drives.

 

[Bruce Chambers]

Greetings --

Your network administrator has such a poor grasp of simple English
syntax and grammar that it's hard to take anything he's written (and
there were some glaring technical inconsistencies, if I understood the
broken English correctly) seriously. I don't believe he's actually
quoting any official Microsoft document. He certainly displays a
woeful ignorance of the way the hard drive's swap file and temporary
files are constantly growing and shrinking many times a day as data
files and emails are created, opened, read, re-written, deleted, etc.

Bruce Chambers

--
Help us help you:



You can have peace. Or you can have freedom. Don't ever count on
having both at once. -- RAH

 

[Kent W. England [MVP]]

Syntax is about the construction of a meaningful sentence. Proper
syntax, or adherence to the rules, requires proper grammar and spelling
and the use of words in appropriate context of their meaning and
definition.

Semantics is about the meaning of the construction. What do the words
all together mean and is the meaning correct and true?

An example from the post in question is "If you install and remove
programs frequently, you should defrag the drive as often as once per
week."
followed by
"If, however, you tend to use the same applications for long periods of
time and you don't move files around, you can get away with defragging
your drives."

So, in each of these two mutually exclusive situations, the advice is
the same, making the reader wonder what went wrong with the construction
(syntax) to destoy the meaning (semantics). Since the syntax of the
second sentence is at least clumsy, we can assume the error is there.

I apologize if you think I was being mean-spirited or obtuse. I was
merely trying to be witty. At least one person thought I succeeded, and
I am therefore satisfied that my syntax and semantics are correct.