Guest AlexB Posted January 1, 2008 Posted January 1, 2008 In WinXP the defragmenting procedure was transparent, simple and straightforward. In Vista it is nothing but. The complete insensitivity of the designers to the users psychology is appalling. I started defragmenting 5 hours ago. It is just one click of a button. There is a message: Defragmenting Hard Disks. I wanted to defragment only one disk: C:. Why disks? What is it doing now? There is no color bar of WinXP which showed the progress in a reassuring manner. You could clearly see how much time you had left. You could do some shopping, etc. Is there any way the old display could be brought back? If not, then perhaps I should switch to my WinXP partition and do defragmenting from there? How about defragmenting Vista C: from WinXP D: drive? Is it going to work? thanks. Quote
Guest Engel Posted January 2, 2008 Posted January 2, 2008 RE: Defragmenting http://www.microsoft.com/communities/newsgroups/en-us/default.aspx?query=+Defragmenting&dg=microsoft.public.windows.vista.general&cat=en_US_9CA88DDB-D18D-FA0E-A366-6E527B0FBA67&lang=en&cr=US&pt=&catlist=&dglist=&ptlist=&exp=1&sloc=en-us "AlexB" wrote: > In WinXP the defragmenting procedure was transparent, simple and > straightforward. In Vista it is nothing but. The complete insensitivity of > the designers to the users psychology is appalling. I started defragmenting > 5 hours ago. It is just one click of a button. There is a message: > Defragmenting Hard Disks. I wanted to defragment only one disk: C:. Why > disks? > > What is it doing now? There is no color bar of WinXP which showed the > progress in a reassuring manner. You could clearly see how much time you had > left. You could do some shopping, etc. > > Is there any way the old display could be brought back? > > If not, then perhaps I should switch to my WinXP partition and do > defragmenting from there? How about defragmenting Vista C: from WinXP D: > drive? Is it going to work? > > thanks. > > Quote
Guest CB Posted January 2, 2008 Posted January 2, 2008 RE: Defragmenting "AlexB" wrote: > In WinXP the defragmenting procedure was transparent, simple and > straightforward. In Vista it is nothing but. The complete insensitivity of > the designers to the users psychology is appalling. I started defragmenting > 5 hours ago. It is just one click of a button. There is a message: > Defragmenting Hard Disks. I wanted to defragment only one disk: C:. Why > disks? > > What is it doing now? There is no color bar of WinXP which showed the > progress in a reassuring manner. You could clearly see how much time you had > left. You could do some shopping, etc. > > Is there any way the old display could be brought back? > > If not, then perhaps I should switch to my WinXP partition and do > defragmenting from there? How about defragmenting Vista C: from WinXP D: > drive? Is it going to work? > > thanks. > > AlexB, I assume you are using Vista. The defragmentation in Vista works differently than in XP. In Vista the defragmenting is continuous when free resources are available. It is programmed this way so that it doesn't take away your system's resources when you need them for other programs. I consider this an improvement over XP. I don't know why some people like to watch the defragmentation process as it is ongoing. It doesn't really tell you anything. Also, the progress bar in XP was not accurate and means nothing really. If you want to watch the process as it happens you could download and install the free defrag from Auslogics. It works rather quickly. I have also used DiskKeeper but wasn't satisfied with it. I have also used PerfectDisk and found it to be quite good. However, with PerfectDisk the files are arranged in a manner that best suits the individual computer user. It bundles together the files and programs you use the most, making it easier to keep defragmented. However, this is really not an advantage since the files are going to be dumped onto your hard drive in the first available free space regardless of where it is. Your files are going to be placed in numerous small free spaces if they are available as opposed to placing the file in one large unused contiguous space. Have a nice day. C.B. Quote
Guest David Posted January 2, 2008 Posted January 2, 2008 Re: Defragmenting I've tried Auslogics product too and like it. But, I have to agree with the OP. Vista's defrag *seems* to take so very much longer than XP's that I too would appreciate some kind of progress bar. For those of us who sometimes defrag manually, it would also be nice to have back the feature which analyzed the drive and stated whether it needed to be done. If defragmentation is going on in the background, why does the defrag routine take so long? "CB" <CB@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message news:6D6C0EB9-78B6-4441-9C26-E0201BFDC670@microsoft.com... > > > "AlexB" wrote: > >> In WinXP the defragmenting procedure was transparent, simple and >> straightforward. In Vista it is nothing but. The complete insensitivity >> of >> the designers to the users psychology is appalling. I started >> defragmenting >> 5 hours ago. It is just one click of a button. There is a message: >> Defragmenting Hard Disks. I wanted to defragment only one disk: C:. Why >> disks? >> >> What is it doing now? There is no color bar of WinXP which showed the >> progress in a reassuring manner. You could clearly see how much time you >> had >> left. You could do some shopping, etc. >> >> Is there any way the old display could be brought back? >> >> If not, then perhaps I should switch to my WinXP partition and do >> defragmenting from there? How about defragmenting Vista C: from WinXP D: >> drive? Is it going to work? >> >> thanks. >> >> > > AlexB, > > I assume you are using Vista. The defragmentation in Vista works > differently > than in XP. In Vista the defragmenting is continuous when free resources > are > available. It is programmed this way so that it doesn't take away your > system's resources when you need them for other programs. I consider this > an > improvement over XP. > > I don't know why some people like to watch the defragmentation process as > it > is ongoing. It doesn't really tell you anything. Also, the progress bar in > XP > was not accurate and means nothing really. > > If you want to watch the process as it happens you could download and > install the free defrag from Auslogics. It works rather quickly. I have > also > used DiskKeeper but wasn't satisfied with it. I have also used PerfectDisk > and found it to be quite good. However, with PerfectDisk the files are > arranged in a manner that best suits the individual computer user. It > bundles > together the files and programs you use the most, making it easier to keep > defragmented. However, this is really not an advantage since the files are > going to be dumped onto your hard drive in the first available free space > regardless of where it is. Your files are going to be placed in numerous > small free spaces if they are available as opposed to placing the file in > one > large unused contiguous space. > > Have a nice day. > > C.B. Quote
Guest Mick Murphy Posted January 2, 2008 Posted January 2, 2008 Re: Defragmenting David, there is something very strange about some of the posters mindsets! Vista'a original scheduled defrag was 2am or 3am. you leave it at that; or have NO schedule! You don't defrag files that you are working on!!! I would like XP's back too. Check to see the state, Defrag; come back in an hour, done deal! "David" wrote: > I've tried Auslogics product too and like it. > > But, I have to agree with the OP. Vista's defrag *seems* to take so very > much longer than XP's that I too would appreciate some kind of progress bar. > > For those of us who sometimes defrag manually, it would also be nice to have > back the feature which analyzed the drive and stated whether it needed to be > done. > > If defragmentation is going on in the background, why does the defrag > routine take so long? > > > > "CB" <CB@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message > news:6D6C0EB9-78B6-4441-9C26-E0201BFDC670@microsoft.com... > > > > > > "AlexB" wrote: > > > >> In WinXP the defragmenting procedure was transparent, simple and > >> straightforward. In Vista it is nothing but. The complete insensitivity > >> of > >> the designers to the users psychology is appalling. I started > >> defragmenting > >> 5 hours ago. It is just one click of a button. There is a message: > >> Defragmenting Hard Disks. I wanted to defragment only one disk: C:. Why > >> disks? > >> > >> What is it doing now? There is no color bar of WinXP which showed the > >> progress in a reassuring manner. You could clearly see how much time you > >> had > >> left. You could do some shopping, etc. > >> > >> Is there any way the old display could be brought back? > >> > >> If not, then perhaps I should switch to my WinXP partition and do > >> defragmenting from there? How about defragmenting Vista C: from WinXP D: > >> drive? Is it going to work? > >> > >> thanks. > >> > >> > > > > AlexB, > > > > I assume you are using Vista. The defragmentation in Vista works > > differently > > than in XP. In Vista the defragmenting is continuous when free resources > > are > > available. It is programmed this way so that it doesn't take away your > > system's resources when you need them for other programs. I consider this > > an > > improvement over XP. > > > > I don't know why some people like to watch the defragmentation process as > > it > > is ongoing. It doesn't really tell you anything. Also, the progress bar in > > XP > > was not accurate and means nothing really. > > > > If you want to watch the process as it happens you could download and > > install the free defrag from Auslogics. It works rather quickly. I have > > also > > used DiskKeeper but wasn't satisfied with it. I have also used PerfectDisk > > and found it to be quite good. However, with PerfectDisk the files are > > arranged in a manner that best suits the individual computer user. It > > bundles > > together the files and programs you use the most, making it easier to keep > > defragmented. However, this is really not an advantage since the files are > > going to be dumped onto your hard drive in the first available free space > > regardless of where it is. Your files are going to be placed in numerous > > small free spaces if they are available as opposed to placing the file in > > one > > large unused contiguous space. > > > > Have a nice day. > > > > C.B. > > Quote
Aevin Posted January 3, 2008 Posted January 3, 2008 Re: Defragmenting If defragmentation is going on in the background, why does the defrag routine take so long? Because it uses intelligent I/O detection for the CPU and disk. It will back off when the system needs resources for something else. Another reason is that frequently modified files are frequently fragmented, so the vista defragger tries to defrag them when required. I like the Vista proactive approach to defragmentation- automatic is easier on the user as well as the admin, and the disks remain optimized in the background. When you have to administer a large number of PCs, this makes even more sense compared to scheduling defrags or manually executing on each machine. Why not let Vista maintain itself? That's the positives list. On the cons side, Vista defrag gives nearly zero control; so you can't easily select which volumes to defrag and what mode to use, what files to exclude etc. Commercial defragmenters have executed this in a far better manner - a good combination of automatic defrag, performance, speed and control. Quote
Guest Travis Crow Posted January 4, 2008 Posted January 4, 2008 Re: Defragmenting CB wrote: > If you want to watch the process as it happens you could download and > install the free defrag from Auslogics. It works rather quickly. I have also > used DiskKeeper but wasn't satisfied with it. I have also used PerfectDisk Add O&O to the list, not a freebie but quite good. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.