How is the Windows Vista Deframent Tool?

I plan on getting my first Windows Vista laptop in a few weeks.
Since I am on the road often and don't leave my laptop idle for long,
I need a defrag tool that works transparently in the background while
I am using the machine.
I am wondering what people think of the included deframentation tool
in Windows Vista or if a 3rd party application like Diskeeper is
necessary for my needs.

<> wrote in message
news:4fec737e-5f9e-4e8b-8cfe-...
>I plan on getting my first Windows Vista laptop in a few weeks.
> Since I am on the road often and don't leave my laptop idle for long,
> I need a defrag tool that works transparently in the background while
> I am using the machine.
> I am wondering what people think of the included deframentation tool
> in Windows Vista or if a 3rd party application like Diskeeper is
> necessary for my needs.
>

If you want it to work in the background then something like Diskeeper is
what you need.
The default setting on vista of one defrag at 1am on a Wednesday may not
meet your needs.


--

Mike Brannigan

> The default setting on vista of one defrag at 1am on a Wednesday may not
> meet your needs.

Well, I don't really agree with Mike. 1am is just a scheduled start time.
The defrag runs as soon as possible after that if it's switched off at the
time. It runs for as long as necessary, at the lowest CPU priority and the
lowest I/O priority.

In fact, the Vista defrag tool is extremely gentle in terms of CPU, I/O and
memory loading. Apart from some audible disk activity you wouldn't know
it's running.

I strongly recommend that the OP forgets about defragging. Vista will look
after it just fine, quietly and effectively.

Only if you want to watch coloured blocks moving around on the screen should
you buy a third party tool.

Finally, one important warning: some (most??) third party defraggers
interfere with the file placement optimisation that Vista does as part of
its start up optimisation. They could actually make your start up slower.
For that reason, I recommend avoiding them.

See how you go with the built-in one. If you aren't happy, then would be
the time to think about the alternatives. Just remember the caveats.

SteveT

Steve, thanks for your detailed response.
You wrote
"I strongly recommend that the OP forgets about defragging. Vista
will look
after it just fine, quietly and effectively. "

Will it work effectively when the laptop is in use. Something ANY
defrag tool would have trouble with. This is my biggest concern. Again
with my situation, Vista will not be idle that much and I cant leave
my laptop on overnight (with my travel configuration).

On Feb 16, 5:18*pm, "Steve Thackery" <nob...@nowhere.com> wrote:
> > The default setting on vista of one defrag at 1am on a Wednesday may not
> > meet your needs.
>
> Well, I don't really agree with Mike. *1am is just a scheduled start time.
> The defrag runs as soon as possible after that if it's switched off at the
> time. *It runs for as long as necessary, at the lowest CPU priority and the
> lowest I/O priority.
>
> In fact, the Vista defrag tool is extremely gentle in terms of CPU, I/O and
> memory loading. *Apart from some audible disk activity you wouldn't know
> it's running.
>
> I strongly recommend that the OP forgets about defragging. *Vista will look
> after it just fine, quietly and effectively.
>
> Only if you want to watch coloured blocks moving around on the screen should
> you buy a third party tool.
>
> Finally, one important warning: some (most??) third party defraggers
> interfere with the file placement optimisation that Vista does as part of
> its start up optimisation. *They could actually make your start up slower.
> For that reason, I recommend avoiding them.
>
> See how you go with the built-in one. *If you aren't happy, then would be
> the time to think about the alternatives. *Just remember the caveats.
>
> SteveT

"Steve Thackery" <> wrote in message
news:...
>> The default setting on vista of one defrag at 1am on a Wednesday may not
>> meet your needs.
>
> Well, I don't really agree with Mike. 1am is just a scheduled start time.
> The defrag runs as soon as possible after that if it's switched off at the
> time. It runs for as long as necessary, at the lowest CPU priority and
> the lowest I/O priority.
>
> In fact, the Vista defrag tool is extremely gentle in terms of CPU, I/O
> and memory loading. Apart from some audible disk activity you wouldn't
> know it's running.
>
> I strongly recommend that the OP forgets about defragging. Vista will
> look after it just fine, quietly and effectively.
>
> Only if you want to watch coloured blocks moving around on the screen
> should you buy a third party tool.
>
> Finally, one important warning: some (most??) third party defraggers
> interfere with the file placement optimisation that Vista does as part of
> its start up optimisation. They could actually make your start up slower.
> For that reason, I recommend avoiding them.
>
> See how you go with the built-in one. If you aren't happy, then would be
> the time to think about the alternatives. Just remember the caveats.
>
> SteveT

Having worked with the Diskeeper tool for nearly 10 years (from the NT 3.x
variants right up to the latest Vista and Server 2008 versions) I have to
take issue with a couple of your points.

The UI for Diskeeper does not just display blocks moving around in fact the
latest invisi-tasking had no visible UI unless the end user wants to see it
and obviously has nothing better to do.
The processing behind Diskeeper not only runs at low priority but also
honours the interrupts in processing due to other higher priority disk
access by the OS or end user processes, so effectively can run continuously
in the background not even "stealing" CPU cycles bit just using genuine
moments of inactivity.
Diskeeper fully honours the disk layout changes by the OS as regards startup
time optimisations undertaken but will still perform where necessary and
optimal defrag on these files to ensure the fastest startup time possible
and pre fetching processing.

The major point here is that the built in defrag tools is a one shot deal
scheduled to run when you want or triggered manually by the end user
products such as Diskeeper can run continuously in the background not
impacting performance but increasing the disk and file IO of the device
without detriment to the ongoing use of the system.


--

Mike Brannigan

<> wrote in message
news:98eb800c-06c6-4a05-af82-...
Steve, thanks for your detailed response.
You wrote
"I strongly recommend that the OP forgets about defragging. Vista
will look
after it just fine, quietly and effectively. "

Will it work effectively when the laptop is in use. Something ANY
defrag tool would have trouble with. This is my biggest concern. Again
with my situation, Vista will not be idle that much and I cant leave
my laptop on overnight (with my travel configuration).

On Feb 16, 5:18 pm, "Steve Thackery" <nob...@nowhere.com> wrote:
> > The default setting on vista of one defrag at 1am on a Wednesday may not
> > meet your needs.
>
> Well, I don't really agree with Mike. 1am is just a scheduled start time.
> The defrag runs as soon as possible after that if it's switched off at the
> time. It runs for as long as necessary, at the lowest CPU priority and the
> lowest I/O priority.
>
> In fact, the Vista defrag tool is extremely gentle in terms of CPU, I/O
> and
> memory loading. Apart from some audible disk activity you wouldn't know
> it's running.
>
> I strongly recommend that the OP forgets about defragging. Vista will look
> after it just fine, quietly and effectively.
>
> Only if you want to watch coloured blocks moving around on the screen
> should
> you buy a third party tool.
>
> Finally, one important warning: some (most??) third party defraggers
> interfere with the file placement optimisation that Vista does as part of
> its start up optimisation. They could actually make your start up slower.
> For that reason, I recommend avoiding them.
>
> See how you go with the built-in one. If you aren't happy, then would be
> the time to think about the alternatives. Just remember the caveats.
>
> SteveT


You should get Diskeeper 2008. You will hardly realize that it is installed,
let alone running..

--
Mike Hall - MVP
How to construct a good post..
http://dts-l.com/goodpost.htm
How to use the Microsoft Product Support Newsgroups..
http://support.microsoft.com/default...help&style=toc
Mike's Window - My Blog..
http://msmvps.com/blogs/mikehall/default.aspx

<> wrote in message
news:98eb800c-06c6-4a05-af82-...
Steve, thanks for your detailed response.
You wrote
"I strongly recommend that the OP forgets about defragging. Vista
will look
after it just fine, quietly and effectively. "

Will it work effectively when the laptop is in use. Something ANY
defrag tool would have trouble with. This is my biggest concern. Again
with my situation, Vista will not be idle that much and I cant leave
my laptop on overnight (with my travel configuration).



The built in tools will not deliver what you want as it is either a
scheduled run ort a manually triggered event. See my response to Steve for
more detail.
--
Mike Brannigan

<> wrote in message
news:98eb800c-06c6-4a05-af82-...
Steve, thanks for your detailed response.
You wrote
"I strongly recommend that the OP forgets about defragging. Vista
will look
after it just fine, quietly and effectively. "

Will it work effectively when the laptop is in use. Something ANY
defrag tool would have trouble with. This is my biggest concern. Again
with my situation, Vista will not be idle that much and I cant leave
my laptop on overnight (with my travel configuration).

On Feb 16, 5:18 pm, "Steve Thackery" <nob...@nowhere.com> wrote:
> > The default setting on vista of one defrag at 1am on a Wednesday may not
> > meet your needs.
>
> Well, I don't really agree with Mike. 1am is just a scheduled start time.
> The defrag runs as soon as possible after that if it's switched off at the
> time. It runs for as long as necessary, at the lowest CPU priority and the
> lowest I/O priority.
>
> In fact, the Vista defrag tool is extremely gentle in terms of CPU, I/O
> and
> memory loading. Apart from some audible disk activity you wouldn't know
> it's running.
>
> I strongly recommend that the OP forgets about defragging. Vista will look
> after it just fine, quietly and effectively.
>
> Only if you want to watch coloured blocks moving around on the screen
> should
> you buy a third party tool.
>
> Finally, one important warning: some (most??) third party defraggers
> interfere with the file placement optimisation that Vista does as part of
> its start up optimisation. They could actually make your start up slower.
> For that reason, I recommend avoiding them.
>
> See how you go with the built-in one. If you aren't happy, then would be
> the time to think about the alternatives. Just remember the caveats.
>
> SteveT

> The major point here is that the built in defrag tools is a one shot deal
> scheduled to run when you want or triggered manually by the end user
> products such as Diskeeper can run continuously in the background not
> impacting performance but increasing the disk and file IO of the device
> without detriment to the ongoing use of the system.

You've said that a couple of times now, but I don't agree. Diskeeper is
indeed a fine product, and I used it all the time on my XP machines.
However, in Vista the built-in defragger *effectively* does run
continuously, in as much as it takes hours, sometimes days to run. It also
backs off in terms of CPU and I/O, just like Diskeeper.

Honestly, I use the Vista defrag on my laptop and it really is fine.

I repeat my advice to the OP - try the in-built one first, before committing
to spending your money on a third party solution.

SteveT

"Steve Thackery" <> a écrit dans le message de
news:...
>> The major point here is that the built in defrag tools is a one shot deal
>> scheduled to run when you want or triggered manually by the end user
>> products such as Diskeeper can run continuously in the background not
>> impacting performance but increasing the disk and file IO of the device
>> without detriment to the ongoing use of the system.
>
> You've said that a couple of times now, but I don't agree. Diskeeper is
> indeed a fine product, and I used it all the time on my XP machines.
> However, in Vista the built-in defragger *effectively* does run
> continuously, in as much as it takes hours, sometimes days to run. It
> also backs off in terms of CPU and I/O, just like Diskeeper.
>
> Honestly, I use the Vista defrag on my laptop and it really is fine.
>
> I repeat my advice to the OP - try the in-built one first, before
> committing to spending your money on a third party solution.
>
> SteveT


I may add that Diskeeper on XP always produced disk errors.
TheVista defragmenter does not.

If you are serious about computing and shift around lots of data all the
time get
another 3rd party defragmenter..

if you dont shift around lots of data, and leave your computer on all night
without using it
then the vista defrag will be good enough for you


<> wrote in message
news:4fec737e-5f9e-4e8b-8cfe-...
>I plan on getting my first Windows Vista laptop in a few weeks.
> Since I am on the road often and don't leave my laptop idle for long,
> I need a defrag tool that works transparently in the background while
> I am using the machine.
> I am wondering what people think of the included deframentation tool
> in Windows Vista or if a 3rd party application like Diskeeper is
> necessary for my needs.
>