Free Defragger

Can someone recommend a good FREE defragger that shows the process as it did
in W98 and XP? I can't stand having no damn idea how long it will take when
I have other things to do. Why the hell was it changed so no one has a clue
how fragmented the drive is or how long it will take?

news.microsoft.com wrote:
> Can someone recommend a good FREE defragger that shows the process as it
> did in W98 and XP? I can't stand having no damn idea how long it will
> take when I have other things to do. Why the hell was it changed so no
> one has a clue how fragmented the drive is or how long it will take?

Try this one...

http://www.auslogics.com/en/software/disk-defrag

Robert Maskill - G4PYR - Peterborough Cambridgeshire
MF Coastal Radio www.coastalradio.org.uk
Orton info community web site www.ortoninfo.co.uk
Nene Valley Railway Pictures www.nvrpics.org.uk/

This one is a good one. Optimizes as well as defrags.
http://www.kessels.com/Jkdefrag/

Larry


"news.microsoft.com" <> wrote in message
news:...
Can someone recommend a good FREE defragger that shows the process as it did
in W98 and XP? I can't stand having no damn idea how long it will take when
I have other things to do. Why the hell was it changed so no one has a clue
how fragmented the drive is or how long it will take?

The whole idea behind the Vista defragmenter is it works in the background
and you ***don't*** have to be concerned about it. And I see no reason why
you can not keep working with your customers. The Vista defragmenter will
not prevent you from doing so.

Years ago there was NO defragmenter in Windows and people did not have this
preoccupation with watching blocks move around.

You will get no better performance out of your computer by using a 3rd party
defragmenter than you will by allowing the Vista defragmenter to do its
thing!

Chill a bit and just use your computer.

--

Richard Urban
Microsoft MVP
Windows Desktop Experience


"news.microsoft.com" <> wrote in message
news:...
> Can someone recommend a good FREE defragger that shows the process as it
> did in W98 and XP? I can't stand having no damn idea how long it will
> take when I have other things to do. Why the hell was it changed so no one
> has a clue how fragmented the drive is or how long it will take?

Richard Urban wrote:
> The whole idea behind the Vista defragmenter is it works in the
> background and you ***don't*** have to be concerned about it. And I see
> no reason why you can not keep working with your customers. The Vista
> defragmenter will not prevent you from doing so.
>
> Years ago there was NO defragmenter in Windows and people did not have
> this preoccupation with watching blocks move around.
>
> You will get no better performance out of your computer by using a 3rd
> party defragmenter than you will by allowing the Vista defragmenter to
> do its thing!
>
> Chill a bit and just use your computer.
>

I can't say I disagree with the above, I do my main business machine
once a month overnight and I must admit I rarely can tell much if any
difference in the perceived performance before and after


--
Robert Maskill - G4PYR - Peterborough Cambridgeshire
MF Coastal Radio www.coastalradio.org.uk
Orton info community web site www.ortoninfo.co.uk
Nene Valley Railway Pictures www.nvrpics.org.uk/

Hi,

Just to add what others have said, defrag in Vista is an ongoing process. It
doesn't end, but rather constantly works to keep the system in top shape. It
runs as a low priority task so as not to interfere with the system usage. If
you use a third party program and let it run complete, then first you aren't
using the system for what you bought it for, and second the minute you begin
using it you will be re-fragmenting the system until you decide to manually
run it again.

--
Best of Luck,

Rick Rogers, aka "Nutcase" - Microsoft MVP
http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/
Windows help - www.rickrogers.org
My thoughts http://rick-mvp.blogspot.com

"news.microsoft.com" <> wrote in message
news:...
> Can someone recommend a good FREE defragger that shows the process as it
> did in W98 and XP? I can't stand having no damn idea how long it will
> take when I have other things to do. Why the hell was it changed so no one
> has a clue how fragmented the drive is or how long it will take?

You're so busy using your computer that you have time to watch the nice
visual feedback while it defrags for 5-10 minutes. I guess you aren't
**really** using your computer when it is on!

Which is it - you have time to watch - and therefore are not really using
your computer OR you are using your computer and you allow the Vista defrag
to do its thing whenever?



--

Richard Urban
Microsoft MVP
Windows Desktop Experience


"Non Sequitur!" <> wrote in message
news:...
>I have the defrag service running, but I don't leave the computer on at
> night if its not doing something.
> The result is that I actually use the computer when its on (dahhhh) and
> the
> defrag doesn't have much time to kick in...
>
> The drives are constantly fragmented unless I do a manual defrag.
>
> I also have lot of file traffic (programs files and downloads)
>
> sorry but like almost every stupid innovation of vista, this sucks
>
> Vista should have had a good manual defrag with visual feedback.. hey XP
> had that! lol
>
>
>
>
> "Rick Rogers" <> wrote in message
> news:#...
>> Hi,
>>
>> Just to add what others have said, defrag in Vista is an ongoing process.
>> It doesn't end, but rather constantly works to keep the system in top
>> shape. It runs as a low priority task so as not to interfere with the
>> system usage. If you use a third party program and let it run complete,
>> then first you aren't using the system for what you bought it for, and
>> second the minute you begin using it you will be re-fragmenting the
>> system until you decide to manually run it again.
>>
>> --
>> Best of Luck,
>>
>> Rick Rogers, aka "Nutcase" - Microsoft MVP
>> http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/
>> Windows help - www.rickrogers.org
>> My thoughts http://rick-mvp.blogspot.com
>>
>> "news.microsoft.com" <> wrote in message
>> news:...
>>> Can someone recommend a good FREE defragger that shows the process as it
>>> did in W98 and XP? I can't stand having no damn idea how long it will
>>> take when I have other things to do. Why the hell was it changed so no
>>> one has a clue how fragmented the drive is or how long it will take?
>>

The Vista disk defragmenter works in the background to save you the trouble
of watching it defragment. However, if you really want to see what is going
on Auslogic Disk Defrag is probably one of the better disk defragmenters.

--

--
John Barnett MVP
Windows XP Associate Expert
Windows Desktop Experience

Web: http://xphelpandsupport.mvps.org
Web: http://vistasupport.mvps.org
Web: http://www.silversurfer-guide.com

The information in this mail/post is supplied "as is". No warranty of any
kind, either expressed or implied, is made in relation to the accuracy,
reliability or content of this mail/post. The Author shall not be liable for
any direct, indirect, incidental or consequential damages arising out of the
use of, or inability to use, information or opinions expressed in this
mail/post..


"news.microsoft.com" <> wrote in message
news:...
> Can someone recommend a good FREE defragger that shows the process as it
> did in W98 and XP? I can't stand having no damn idea how long it will
> take when I have other things to do. Why the hell was it changed so no one
> has a clue how fragmented the drive is or how long it will take?

news.microsoft.com wrote:
> Can someone recommend a good FREE defragger that shows the process as it
> did in W98 and XP? I can't stand having no damn idea how long it will
> take when I have other things to do. Why the hell was it changed so no
> one has a clue how fragmented the drive is or how long it will take?

Google Auslogics.

--
"...every non-modular OS SUCKS...Speaking for myself only."
- zachd [MSFT]

DRM and unintended consequences:
http://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/se...35&tag=nl.e101

On Thu, 16 Oct 2008 02:48:57 -0400, "Richard Urban"
<> wrote:

>The whole idea behind the Vista defragmenter is it works in the background
>and you ***don't*** have to be concerned about it. And I see no reason why
>you can not keep working with your customers. The Vista defragmenter will
>not prevent you from doing so.

Except it doesn't work all that well. There are articles written on
the subject. FWIW, they've been telling us we didn't have to defrag
since NT/NTFS and it hasn't been true.

>Years ago there was NO defragmenter in Windows and people did not have this
>preoccupation with watching blocks move around.

Actually, we used one from Norton. As for seeing little blocks moving
around... I don't really need that, but some sort of status before
starting and a reasonable display of progress is worthwhile. Vista
give you the dumbed down display instead "this will take from several
minutes to several hours". Nice.

>You will get no better performance out of your computer by using a 3rd party
>defragmenter than you will by allowing the Vista defragmenter to do its
>thing!

Well, do some research on that point. Or run the manual defrag in
Vista... let me know how long it has to run to defrag a drive that
should not need defragging if the background process is really
working.

>
>Chill a bit and just use your computer.

Some of us like to squeeze what performance we can out of this bloated
OS.