Disk Defragmenter

[MrRiplEy[H]]

A heavily used pc will always benefit from a defrag.

Very marginally, especially due to disk i/o _not_ being used 99% time during gaming. Well, unless the system starts to swap which means your performance is obliterated immediately anyway.

Funny that you mentioned the 'little bit of knowledge' since I've fixed countless client's problems through pointing them in the right direction after they've tried hopelessly to defrag untill their disks burn red.

[OOZ662]

Entertainingly enough, an idle Windows system defrags itself along with running the Indexing Service if they're both enabled. Makes me wonder if Ripley defrags more than he thinks.

[MrRiplEy[H]]

Entertainingly enough, an idle Windows system defrags itself along with running the Indexing Service if they're both enabled. Makes me wonder if Ripley defrags more than he thinks.

Entertainingly enough I run 17 processes. That means no.

If you want to waste your time for neglible performance gains - defrag all you like. But it will never be the answer to your _real_ performance bottlenecks. You're polishing a turd so to speak.

[OOZ662]

What does processes have to do with it? The auto-defrag isn't in a process, as far as I remember. I disabled it a very long time ago and don't remember how.

[MrRiplEy[H]]

What does processes have to do with it? The auto-defrag isn't in a process, as far as I remember. I disabled it a very long time ago and don't remember how.

You ask that question and you seriously think you have any stand in this conversation? Oh puhleeze.

[OOZ662]

Why would I need "stand" in this conversation? What should be friendly banter shouldn't need "stand."

I went back and searched out how to disable it. It's a registry entry and has nothing to do with processes. Amazingly enough, Windows does it on its own without having a process idling around waiting for it, it seems.

[MrRiplEy[H]]

Why would I need "stand" in this conversation? What should be friendly banter shouldn't need "stand."

I went back and searched out how to disable it. It's a registry entry and has nothing to do with processes. Amazingly enough, Windows does it on its own without having a process idling around waiting for it, it seems.

It's an option in a common tool called 'tweakui' for example, no need to edit registry manually. What I meant is that I have fair knowledge on how my computer works and that the prefetcher does a partial defrag as part of its process. Since windows contains built in functions for basic defragging there is really no need to mess with it manually anymore.

If the filesystem doesn't work on it's own you have a problem somewhere else than not having defragged.

[TequilaChaser]

1st hope Larry got his system/Hd working........

2nd, yes WinXP and newer is far less to have fragmentation problems than older OS systems.......unless......

like me, I have 4 HD's on my most used PC system........and I do alot of DVD burning & Music CD burning on one particular 320 gig SATA II HD.... this HD will become more than 25 to 30 % fragmented in under 30 days , all depending on how much burning I am doing.......

while the other 3 HD's will and most times remains under 2 to 3 % fragmented on any given day of the year when checked......

I also use the same HD that I use for my DVD's & CD's for all of my autocad work on blueprints and HVAC duct design...... so that one particular HD has alot of files being made, moved, deleted, etc....

so MrRipley is pretty much correct in his opinion of todays systems and hardware........all depending on the personal use of such hardware/system.....

edit: the tweakui, Ripley mentions, I remember as  MS tech's "Power Toys"  back when Windows 3.11 for work groups thru Win2000 .........have not looked for such a tool/power toy in a long while .......no need for it really.....