Memory Defragmenter?

  • Thread starter Thread starter ColTom2
  • Start date Start date
Good catch. :) I was wondering why everyone was dissing hard drive
defragmenters. Hehe. Sorry
 
Good catch. :) I was wondering why everyone was dissing hard drive
defragmenters. Hehe. Sorry
 
yeh, well most of us
are older and have been
using computers before
dos was born and most
of the rude punks on this
block.

but like registry cleaning
microsoft also invented
the memory manager, thus
the industry/market place
followed by building better
versions.

in regards to vista's
capabilities of managing
memory, microsoft software
is designed perfectly to manage
it's own resources on whatever
machine is on the market.

the problem is that
no body in the world,
except microsoft testing
labs, has a machine with
only windows (or vista)
installed on it and nothing
else.

the problems of poorly
designed software both by
famous corporations and
the little guys in a garage is
that the programming is less
than perfect and corrupts the
resources that windows relies
upon. many of the advanced
features windows is designed
to provide are interfered with
by poorly designed software.


however, memory managers
are simply little utilities that help
in certain situations.

the better ones are designed to clear/flush
out third party processes that did not
unload as they were supposed to, thus
inhibiting the performance of the
o.s. and the machine.

on occasion i use a similar utility
and have ascertain the facts that
support the benefits.

so my occasional suggestions
to others who inquire about them
are based on numbers/algorithms/
facts that i have ascertained.

in regards to your comments
about mvp's - this is another issue
and it is best not to mix apples and oranges
until you have done your research
on this issue as well.
--

db ·´¯`·.¸. said:
<)))º>·´¯`·.¸. , . .·´¯`·.. ><)))º>`·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·...¸><)))º>
Click to expand...


..
 
I cannot visualize or comprehend how a memory defragger could work.
Very simple problem---If memory address XXX was a branch instruction to go
to address YYY
(assuming no indexing) what happens if YYY gets moved due to defrag?
 
What does that have to do with NT operating systems? Nothing, that is
what it has to do with NT memory management. These things were never
part of the NT family of operating systems so if you want to back your
claims about your snake oil programs post some relevant and real data to
back up your claims.

John
 
Those who don't know what they are talking about make up silly posts
like yours. Your answers about your so called "algorithms" is getting
worn out. Instead of posting your nonsense why don't you post actual
test results and data? Your refusal to elaborate on your "algorithms"
simply proves that you haven't got a clue about the workings of memory
defragemeters, they are nothing more than snake oil.

John
 
in message
db ´¯`·.. ><)))º>` .. . wrote:
Click to expand...

Those who don't know what they are talking about make up silly posts
like yours. Your answers about your so called "algorithms" is
getting worn out. Instead of posting your nonsense why don't you
post actual test results and data? Your refusal to elaborate on
your "algorithms" simply proves that you haven't got a clue about
the workings of memory defragemeters, they are nothing more than
snake oil.
Click to expand...

Look at the poster's moniker. See all those symbol characters? Guess
what they depict. See the fish? See the fishing line? He's a
troller that announces himself as such. You are feeding a troll.
 
unfortunately, you guys
with the manure mouths
are not wise enough to figure
it out.

TS

--

db ·´¯`·.¸. said:
<)))º>·´¯`·.¸. , . .·´¯`·.. ><)))º>`·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·...¸><)))º>
Click to expand...


..
 
db ´¯`·.. > said:
all the replies
are hilarious.

sounds like those
times when people
asked about registry
cleaners....

the unfortunate aspect
about their opinions is
that windows operating
system validates the results.

since they don't know where
or how to measure the algorithms,
they will disprove anything
not understood...
Click to expand...

I'm still trying to decide whether you really believe what you're posting,
are on a wind-up, or simply have no clue what you're talking about. I'm
leaning towards the latter.

If you're so correct and almost everyone else is wrong why do you refuse to
respond to any challenges with anything other than this generalised
nonsense?

Ed Metcalfe.
 
honestly, i don't
know who you
are.

is there a reason
why your challenges
should mean anything to
me ???

instead of hijacking someone
else's thread, feel free to simply create
your own thread for your own
question.

challenge yourself with
this:

http://www.microsoft.com/wn3/locales/help/help_en-us.htm#PostNewQuestion

--

db ·´¯`·.¸. said:
<)))º>·´¯`·.¸. , . .·´¯`·.. ><)))º>`·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·...¸><)))º>
Click to expand...


..
 
Putting all the flak aside for a moment, I would like to know whether
the consensus of the intelligent and informed XPert's that it is good
practice to periodically use the built in Windows XP defrag utility
because it is useful and sufficient? I am no XPert and signed up to
the news group to learn.
 
Absolutely beneficial and good practice. I run at least once a week. Run
disk cleanup first.
 
Ed said:
I'm still trying to decide whether you really believe what you're posting,
are on a wind-up, or simply have no clue what you're talking about. I'm
leaning towards the latter.

If you're so correct and almost everyone else is wrong why do you refuse to
respond to any challenges with anything other than this generalised
nonsense?

Ed Metcalfe.
Click to expand...
Once in a while db comes up with a decent answer. I'm still waiting,
though, for him to find the shift key...

Bill
 
When did he come up with a decent answer?????
Bill Sharpe said:
Once in a while db comes up with a decent answer. I'm still waiting,
though, for him to find the shift key...

Bill
Click to expand...
 
apistomaster said:
Putting all the flak aside for a moment, I would like to know whether
the consensus of the intelligent and informed XPert's that it is good
practice to periodically use the built in Windows XP defrag utility
because it is useful and sufficient? I am no XPert and signed up to
the news group to learn.
Click to expand...

You should probably run it sometimes, but how often depends on how you use
the computer. If you often edit files changing their lengths that increases
the need. If you do a lot of installing and uninstalling that increases the
need. If your hard id formatted in NTFS instead of FAT32 that decreases the
need. I defrag faithfully every year. Or two.
 
Frank Saunders MS-MVP IE said:
You should probably run it sometimes, but how often depends on how you use
the computer. If you often edit files changing their lengths that
increases the need. If you do a lot of installing and uninstalling that
increases the need. If your hard id formatted in NTFS instead of FAT32
that decreases the need. I defrag faithfully every year. Or two.
Click to expand...

If you computer gets heavy use, lots of deleting and saving of files, once
every 2 months is sufficient.

Analyze first and Defragmenter will suggest if the drive needs defragmenting
or not. Ignore the red on the graph, as people tend to interpret this as
bad, but it may just mean you have one or two very large files that are
split into 2 fragments. Defragmenting these files will have no impact on
performance.
 
Absolutely beneficial and good practice. I run at least once a week. Run





- Show quoted text -
Click to expand...

Thank you for the responses. I am a light weight user and this is my
first computer but I did grasp correctly apparently that I should run
disk clean up before hard drive disk defrag. Fairly infrequently since
I still have 77% of free space on my 80 gb hard drive after 18 months;
I did understand that defragging had nothing to do with the RAM
memory.
Now I also know that added defrag programs are an unnecessary waste of
money.
Thanks again for clarifying this issue. I got what I want,
confirmation that some of what I think I;ve learned is correct.
 
Back
Top