Defragmenter
in [Computers]
|
Prev: IExplorer open minimised
Next: Cheese
From: Brad on 28 Apr 2010 18:11 "SG1" <lostitall(a)the.races> wrote in message news:gz0Cn.151978$NH1.125580(a)newsfe14.iad... : : "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa(a)gmail.com> wrote in message : news:83rh2bFhknU1(a)mid.individual.net... : > Rob wrote : >> SG1 wrote : > : >>> Is there a free alternative to M$ defragmenter as per XP. It is soooo : >>> slow. Comments about not needing to defragment are not encouraged : >>> Roddles. : > : >> Not sure where this slots in but - : > : > It doesnt. : > : >> W7 its recommended you configure and run a schedule defrag on regular : >> basis. : > : > What matters is the reason to support that 'recommendation', not just some : > proclamation. : : All 3 disks defragged, Roddles the machine is faster but not by much, there : was some noticeable lag b4 I did it. I like to defrag once in a blue moon or : is that blue chees?? I had taken a heap of files from C & D to my new 1.5TB : F drive and figured rightly or wrongly that I should defrag to make : contiguous what I could. It will probably become a monthly event now that I : no longer have to use the M$ product. As it was done during a period of : insomnia, the time taken is not all that relevant. In future I will set it : up at night as a go to bed job. : : > : > : : Using a 1.5 tb drive as the system disk is not that flash an idea really. With the price of HDD now it is much better to get a quick small system dish and use the mass storage on another drive. Installing large programs (CS4 etc..) and games onto the second drive will enable the C to stay fairly clean and will speed defrag by a hundred percent. At home I have the system drive as a small SSD although I think they are way over rated but once the price comes down they will be ideal. I think we're all going to see how elegantly they will fail. -- Brad Leyden 6� 43.5816' S 146� 59.3097' E WGS84 To mail spam is really hot but please reply to thread so all may benefit (or laugh at my mistakes) > >
From: Rod Speed on 28 Apr 2010 18:20 SG1 wrote > Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa(a)gmail.com> wrote >> Rob wrote >>> SG1 wrote >>>> Is there a free alternative to M$ defragmenter as per XP. It is soooo slow. Comments about not needing to >>>> defragment are not encouraged Roddles. >>> Not sure where this slots in but - >> It doesnt. >>> W7 its recommended you configure and run a schedule defrag on regular basis. >> What matters is the reason to support that 'recommendation', not just some proclamation. > All 3 disks defragged, Roddles the machine is faster but not by much, there was some noticeable lag b4 I did it. Fragmentation cant produce that. > I like to defrag once in a blue moon or is that blue chees?? If you do it that infrequently, it doesnt matter how long it takes. > I had taken a heap of files from C & D to my new 1.5TB F drive and figured rightly or wrongly that I> should defrag to > make contiguous what I could. Pointless. > It will probably become a monthly event now that I no longer have to use the M$ product. More fool you. > As it was done during a period of insomnia, the time taken is not all that relevant. In future I will set it up at > night as a go to bed job. Complete waste of time to bother.
From: SG1 on 28 Apr 2010 20:38 "Brad" <bradleyden(a)spammail.com> wrote in message news:hrabqa$19k0$1(a)news.ett.com.ua... > > > > "SG1" <lostitall(a)the.races> wrote in message > news:gz0Cn.151978$NH1.125580(a)newsfe14.iad... > : > : "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > : news:83rh2bFhknU1(a)mid.individual.net... > : > Rob wrote > : >> SG1 wrote > : > > : >>> Is there a free alternative to M$ defragmenter as per XP. It is > soooo > : >>> slow. Comments about not needing to defragment are not encouraged > : >>> Roddles. > : > > : >> Not sure where this slots in but - > : > > : > It doesnt. > : > > : >> W7 its recommended you configure and run a schedule defrag on regular > : >> basis. > : > > : > What matters is the reason to support that 'recommendation', not just > some > : > proclamation. > : > : All 3 disks defragged, Roddles the machine is faster but not by much, > there > : was some noticeable lag b4 I did it. I like to defrag once in a blue > moon > or > : is that blue chees?? I had taken a heap of files from C & D to my new > 1.5TB > : F drive and figured rightly or wrongly that I should defrag to make > : contiguous what I could. It will probably become a monthly event now > that > I > : no longer have to use the M$ product. As it was done during a period of > : insomnia, the time taken is not all that relevant. In future I will set > it > : up at night as a go to bed job. > : > : > > : > > : > : > > Using a 1.5 tb drive as the system disk is not that flash an idea really. > With the price of HDD now it is much better to get a quick small system > dish > and use the mass storage on another drive. Installing large programs (CS4 > etc..) and games onto the second drive will enable the C to stay fairly > clean and will speed defrag by a hundred percent. At home I have the > system > drive as a small SSD although I think they are way over rated but once the > price comes down they will be ideal. I think we're all going to see how > elegantly they will fail. System disk did not change, still 149GB job. Both C & D had limited space left due to TV & movies so they were moved to F. > > > -- > Brad Leyden > 6� 43.5816' S 146� 59.3097' E WGS84 > To mail spam is really hot but please reply to thread so all may benefit > (or > laugh at my mistakes) >> >> > >
From: SG1 on 28 Apr 2010 20:39 "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa(a)gmail.com> wrote in message news:83rqm6FbtrU1(a)mid.individual.net... > SG1 wrote >> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa(a)gmail.com> wrote >>> Rob wrote >>>> SG1 wrote > >>>>> Is there a free alternative to M$ defragmenter as per XP. It is soooo >>>>> slow. Comments about not needing to defragment are not encouraged >>>>> Roddles. > >>>> Not sure where this slots in but - > >>> It doesnt. > >>>> W7 its recommended you configure and run a schedule defrag on regular >>>> basis. > >>> What matters is the reason to support that 'recommendation', not just >>> some proclamation. > >> All 3 disks defragged, Roddles the machine is faster but not by much, >> there was some noticeable lag b4 I did it. > > Fragmentation cant produce that. > >> I like to defrag once in a blue moon or is that blue chees?? > > If you do it that infrequently, it doesnt matter how long it takes. > >> I had taken a heap of files from C & D to my new 1.5TB F drive and >> figured rightly or wrongly that I> should defrag to make contiguous what >> I could. > > Pointless. > >> It will probably become a monthly event now that I no longer have to use >> the M$ product. > > More fool you. > >> As it was done during a period of insomnia, the time taken is not all >> that relevant. In future I will set it up at night as a go to bed job. > > Complete waste of time to bother. > Thanks for really positve response Rod.
From: Rod Speed on 28 Apr 2010 23:59
SG1 wrote > Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa(a)gmail.com> wrote >> SG1 wrote >>> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa(a)gmail.com> wrote >>>> Rob wrote >>>>> SG1 wrote >>>>>> Is there a free alternative to M$ defragmenter as per XP. It is soooo slow. Comments about not needing to >>>>>> defragment are not encouraged Roddles. >>>>> Not sure where this slots in but - >>>> It doesnt. >>>>> W7 its recommended you configure and run a schedule defrag on regular basis. >>>> What matters is the reason to support that 'recommendation', not just some proclamation. >>> All 3 disks defragged, Roddles the machine is faster but not by much, there was some noticeable lag b4 I did it. >> Fragmentation cant produce that. >>> I like to defrag once in a blue moon or is that blue chees?? >> If you do it that infrequently, it doesnt matter how long it takes. >>> I had taken a heap of files from C & D to my new 1.5TB F drive and figured rightly or wrongly that I> should defrag >>> to make contiguous what I could. >> Pointless. >>> It will probably become a monthly event now that I no longer have to use the M$ product. >> More fool you. >>> As it was done during a period of insomnia, the time taken is not >>> all that relevant. In future I will set it up at night as a go to bed job. >> Complete waste of time to bother. > Thanks for really positve response Rod. You never ever could bullshit your way out of a wet paper bag. |