Defragmenter

Discussion in 'Windows Vista Performance' started by Chris Robbins, Dec 5, 2006.

  1. Really liked the XP defragmenter. I like to see how the defrag is working
    with the 2 bars displaying results. Any way to run a visual version of
    defrag?
     
    Chris Robbins, Dec 5, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Chris Robbins

    Jeff Guest

    At this point,
    a 3rd party app, like O&O defrag; or Raxco.
    that's if you need gui based, if not, running a command line defrag still
    works great.

    Jeff
     
    Jeff, Dec 5, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Hi Chris,

    Jeff gave you the workaround. To know why this change was made in Vista, check the following FAQ

    "Why was the defrag progress indicator removed?"

    The Filing Cabinet : Disk Defragmenter FAQ:
    http://blogs.technet.com/filecab/pages/disk-defragmenter-faq.aspx

    --
    Regards,

    Ramesh Srinivasan, Microsoft MVP [Windows XP Shell/User]
    Windows® XP Troubleshooting http://www.winhelponline.com


    At this point,
    a 3rd party app, like O&O defrag; or Raxco.
    that's if you need gui based, if not, running a command line defrag still
    works great.

    Jeff
     
    Ramesh, MS-MVP, Dec 5, 2006
    #3
  4. Chris Robbins

    Roy Coorne Guest

    ....or <http://www.auslogics.com/disk-defrag/index.php> which is free.

    Roy
     
    Roy Coorne, Dec 5, 2006
    #4
  5. Chris Robbins

    frankm Guest

    I read the blog below....
    Just a couple of comments...
    1) I don't know who they talked to about the progress gui, but it wasn't
    me, I depend on the snapshot and progress.
    2) The line on the new defrag gui - this may take several minutes to
    several hours is more ambiguous than the progress ever was.
    3) I never believed the 10-11% break point in XP and previous OS's
    anyway. The reason why files get fragmented is that are the most used and
    the most accessed, defrag anyway.
    4) I would REALLY like at least the option of displaying a graphical
    representation of the fragmentation and progress.
    5) Yes there is a multi-pass in defrag, but at least I was used to what
    it was doing and could more or less predict (with the graphical state) when
    to come back to check if it was done.
    6) I now have no idea when or if to run defrag. Is the new MS algorithm
    any better than #3, I don't know, as the state is now hidden.

    Not trying to be difficult, but I really don't want to be "dumbed down".
    Frankm



    Hi Chris,

    Jeff gave you the workaround. To know why this change was made in Vista,
    check the following FAQ

    "Why was the defrag progress indicator removed?"

    The Filing Cabinet : Disk Defragmenter FAQ:
    http://blogs.technet.com/filecab/pages/disk-defragmenter-faq.aspx

    --
    Regards,

    Ramesh Srinivasan, Microsoft MVP [Windows XP Shell/User]
    Windows® XP Troubleshooting http://www.winhelponline.com


    At this point,
    a 3rd party app, like O&O defrag; or Raxco.
    that's if you need gui based, if not, running a command line defrag still
    works great.

    Jeff
     
    frankm, Dec 9, 2006
    #5
  6. We hear this concern a lot in the newsgroups. I think with XP we did a good
    job of training people to sit and watch the defrag run, because the computer
    was pretty much unusable during defragmentation and your only choices were
    to watch it run or go do something else. My own personal method was to wait
    for my system to become sluggish, add a reminder to Outlook for 5pm on a
    weekday, start defrag, and then go home. Not exactly an elegant solution :)

    With Vista, we designed the defrag to run once a week at night to keep your
    computer in a relatively defragmented state. For end users who don't come to
    newsgroups and don't know the first thing about file systems, the defragger
    runs without their knowledge and keeps their computers defragmented. This is
    a giant leap from XP. But, even if you know about fragmentation and decide
    to run the defragger manually, the computer is still usable--the defragger
    is designed so that you can still do other things on the computer, which
    eliminates the need for a countdown (aka progress indicator) to let you know
    when the computer is usable. We would like for customers to think of defrag
    as a system process that runs when it can and that doesn't interfere with
    your work. In other words, if you want your system to be defragmented but
    don't really care when or how, let the defragger do its thing. Savvy users
    who want very fine control over defragmentation tend to prefer 3rd-party
    defraggers, many of which have been recommended here. These will give you
    the progress and graphical views you're looking for.

    Another option is to use the built-in defrag.exe command-line tool, which
    gives you analysis info (both before and after), different levels of
    defragmentation (see our blog for some parameters), etc. If you want to know
    what the defragger is up to, you could set up a scheduled task to run an
    analysis before and after defrag and output it to a text file.

    I know these aren't necessarily the answers you're looking for, but I hope
    they clarify our design choices.


    --
    This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.

    Want to learn more about Windows Server file and storage technologies? Visit
    our team blog at http://blogs.technet.com/filecab/default.aspx.


     
    Jill Zoeller [MSFT], Dec 12, 2006
    #6
  7. Chris Robbins

    Tom Lake Guest

    In other words, if you want your system to be defragmented but
    Yeah but does it restart over and over every time I do anything on the machine?

    Tom Lake
     
    Tom Lake, Dec 12, 2006
    #7
  8. Jill Zoeller [MSFT], Dec 12, 2006
    #8
  9. Chris Robbins

    mayor Guest

    Brilliant! People who do not let their computers run overnight will never
    reap the benefits of the crippled defrag, if any.

    --
    Leo
    If at first you do succeed, try not to look astonished.






     
    mayor, Dec 12, 2006
    #9
  10. Chris Robbins

    Ray Guest

    Sigh!

    Quote from the FAQ at
    http://blogs.technet.com/filecab/pages/disk-defragmenter-faq.aspx

    "What about if the computer is off when it is supposed to be defragmented?
    When will the next defrag take place?
    Disk Defragmenter will run when the computer comes back up for the first
    time after the missed scheduled task. The tasks scheduler team has
    implemented some nice safeguards to limit the impact of such “missed” tasks
    on system performance. More specifically, execution of such tasks will be
    delayed by a few minutes so that they do not interfere with a computer
    booting up or resuming from hibernate/sleep. In addition, such tasks are
    serialized and occur one at a time."
     
    Ray, Dec 15, 2006
    #10
  11. Chris Robbins

    mayor Guest

    Why the sigh? My preference is to control what takes place with my computer
    and when it occurs. Why MS wants to decide for me is something I cannot
    understand nor accept.

    --
    Leo
    If at first you do succeed, try not to look astonished.
     
    mayor, Dec 15, 2006
    #11
  12. Chris Robbins

    Ray Guest

    Ok I'll take the sigh back. Does the rest of the post please you, or is my
    interpretation of the way you are using the word "Brilliant!" incorrect?
    Are you praising Microsoft for allowing defrag to run later, or are you
    being sarcastic?
    You seem to be saying two different things here, or not.

    Ray
     
    Ray, Dec 16, 2006
    #12
  13. Chris Robbins

    mayor Guest

    I am displeased with the 'choice' MS has made with the defrag in Vista. The
    'brilliant' comment was directed at MS for that inexplicable 'choice.'

    Because of the defrag issue and other 'choices' MS has made with Vista I am
    leaning toward retaining XP and not purchasing Vista.

    --
    Leo
    If at first you do succeed, try not to look astonished.






     
    mayor, Dec 16, 2006
    #13
  14. Chris Robbins

    frankm Guest

    I do understand what you are saying.
    I look at a system holistically: ok I have Virus Scan, Defender, Adaware,
    defrag et al running.
    I would really like more control over what happens so I don't hit
    interference intersections.
    I do backend disk design for systems and databases (SAN, NAS, local etc). So
    my concern is that amount of control "I" am allowed on my own system.
    Yes I agree that 80% of the users out there NEED defrag to run for them, you
    don't know how many times I have installed "RUNFAST.EXE"; my euphemism for
    defrag.

    But MS shouldn't tell the rest of the 20% (the group that has to support the
    MS stuff for the other 80%) that our views are moot.



     
    frankm, Dec 16, 2006
    #14
  15. Chris Robbins

    mayor Guest

    Clearly MS does not give a hoot about the 20%.

    --
    Leo
    If at first you do succeed, try not to look astonished.






     
    mayor, Dec 16, 2006
    #15
  16. Remember that you can always turn scheduled defrag off in the defrag UI, and
    then make your own task in task scheduler if you want it to run less
    frequently.
    Or just run it with "Defragment Now" or the command line. (running with -v
    gives you statistics before/after as well so you know how badly or how well
    we're doing).

    The only lack of control I see, and I am in the geeky minority/20% just as
    you are, is that scheduled defrag is on by default and I have to turn it
    off. The true pain is indeed the loss of UI, but this represents no loss of
    control. I can still defragment chosen drives manually on my own weird
    schedule with (example) defrag c: z: x: -v at any time
    and get before and after information. The UI could allow a little bit more
    control so that one could defrag <not all drives> but other than that
    there's no *functional (visual? perhaps) deficiency.

    Since defrag is a tool, we made the tool better and dumped the inaccurate
    UI.
     
    Victoria House [MSFT], Jan 2, 2007
    #16
  17. Chris Robbins

    mayor Guest

    MS made the defragmenter better?

    There you have it, the first joke of the year.

    You should realize that what you consider 'better' is not worth a darn
    unless it is what users want. You should also realize that you struck out
    and created a monster that users hate and probably will not use.

    --
    Leo
    Don't steal. The government hates competition.
     
    mayor, Jan 2, 2007
    #17
  18. Chris Robbins

    CZ Guest

    Remember that you can always turn scheduled defrag off in the defrag UI,then make your own task in task scheduler if you want it to run less
    frequently.
    Or just run it with "Defragment Now" or the command line. (running with -v
    gives you statistics before/after as well so you know how badly or how well
    we're doing).

    The only lack of control I see, and I am in the geeky minority/20% just as
    you are, is that scheduled defrag is on by default and I have to turn it
    off. The true pain is indeed the loss of UI, but this represents no loss of
    control. I can still defragment chosen drives manually on my own weird
    schedule with (example) defrag c: z: x: -v at any time
    and get before and after information. The UI could allow a little bit more
    control so that one could defrag <not all drives> but other than that
    there's no *functional (visual? perhaps) deficiency.

    Since defrag is a tool, we made the tool better and dumped the inaccurate
    UI.


    Victoria:

    I just purchased PerfectDisk v8 for use with Vista as I was so disappointed
    with the Vista defragger.
     
    CZ, Jan 3, 2007
    #18
  19. Other than the UI, which has created an overwhelming (majority good, tech
    community often very very bad) response, why buy PerfectDisk?

    I'd like to know if the UI is the "only" thing. If the UI is your beef,
    what 1 thing in the UI do you want most? I know there may be 100's but
    generally there is 1 thing that would affect your satisfaction with defrag
    the most. Feel free to rant about the other things, but put the most
    important thing at the top. UI or engine, 1 feature or thing that bothers
    you/you want and would make you nearly happy.

    CZ - I am especially interested to know what is disappointing with the
    defragger (Does it not work on your volumes? Take too long? As mentioned
    previously I know that the UI defragments all volumes with no control, is
    that the big issue? Or is it the blue and red bars?)

    Keep in mind that my agreeing with you or not does not guarantee anything.
    But I am a good feedback/reference point.

    Just please be nice...
    -Victoria

    --
    This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.


    CZ
    Victoria:

    I just purchased PerfectDisk v8 for use with Vista as I was so disappointed
    with the Vista defragger.
     
    Victoria House [MSFT], Jan 4, 2007
    #19
  20. Chris Robbins

    mayor Guest

    I get the impression from you that the satisfaction and desires of the users
    are not very important. Is MS incapable of providing both a great defrag
    engine and a great interface?

    --
    Leo
    Don't steal. The government hates competition.
     
    mayor, Jan 4, 2007
    #20
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.