defraging

  • Thread starter Thread starter SK
  • Start date Start date
S

SK

Guest
Hi is there a better way to defrag my hard drive with Vista? As I have
noticed that the defrag utility in vista does not give detail or estimated
time of completion unlike in XP an I had defrag running on my laptop for 5
hours and on my desktop computer which is running XP and is slower and has
more stuff on defrags quicker, ok my laptop has a 120GB hard drive and my
desktop only has 80GB but currently my laptop is not one fifth full.

Should defrag take this long in Vista?


SK
 
If defraggings is taking longer to defragment a drive than expected,
the issue can usually be traced back to your antivirus/security/firewall
software. These software products typically install what is known as a
file system filter driver that intercepts and "filters" the disk I/O
- checking to see if any sort of malware is detected - before allowing
the disk I/O to be completed. Many times, the file system filter can't
keep up with the disk I/O that defrag generates - which in turns
results in a slow down in defragmentation.

Try PerfectDisk 8 for free
http://www.raxco.com/products/downloadit/perfectdisk_download.cfm

--
Carey Frisch
Microsoft MVP
Windows Shell/User

----------------------------------------------------------------------

"SK" wrote:

Hi is there a better way to defrag my hard drive with Vista? As I have
noticed that the defrag utility in vista does not give detail or estimated
time of completion unlike in XP an I had defrag running on my laptop for 5
hours and on my desktop computer which is running XP and is slower and has
more stuff on defrags quicker, ok my laptop has a 120GB hard drive and my
desktop only has 80GB but currently my laptop is not one fifth full.

Should defrag take this long in Vista?


SK
 
"SK" wrote in message...

> Should defrag take this long in Vista?

YMMV, but what I do is simply let it run in the background and ignore it.
Vista seems to handle the chore with minimum fuss/no noticeable degradation
of other tasks on this 2 GB Dell XPS 1210.


--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 6/1/07
KarlC@ (the obvious)
 
http://www.auslogics.com/disk-defrag/
Excellent Free Defragger

"SK" <macross@boltblue.com> wrote in message news:31DB971F-B3D5-4BF7-B63B-968D3B4AB3D3@microsoft.com...
> Hi is there a better way to defrag my hard drive with Vista? As I have
> noticed that the defrag utility in vista does not give detail or estimated
> time of completion unlike in XP an I had defrag running on my laptop for 5
> hours and on my desktop computer which is running XP and is slower and has
> more stuff on defrags quicker, ok my laptop has a 120GB hard drive and my
> desktop only has 80GB but currently my laptop is not one fifth full.
>
> Should defrag take this long in Vista?
>
>
> SK
>
 
Perfect Disk is free only 30 days,,,,,, Auslogic is always free for home use.

"SK" <macross@boltblue.com> wrote in message news:31DB971F-B3D5-4BF7-B63B-968D3B4AB3D3@microsoft.com...
> Hi is there a better way to defrag my hard drive with Vista? As I have
> noticed that the defrag utility in vista does not give detail or estimated
> time of completion unlike in XP an I had defrag running on my laptop for 5
> hours and on my desktop computer which is running XP and is slower and has
> more stuff on defrags quicker, ok my laptop has a 120GB hard drive and my
> desktop only has 80GB but currently my laptop is not one fifth full.
>
> Should defrag take this long in Vista?
>
>
> SK
>
 
SK wrote:
> Hi is there a better way to defrag my hard drive with Vista? As I have
> noticed that the defrag utility in vista does not give detail or
> estimated time of completion unlike in XP an I had defrag running on my
> laptop for 5 hours and on my desktop computer which is running XP and is
> slower and has more stuff on defrags quicker, ok my laptop has a 120GB
> hard drive and my desktop only has 80GB but currently my laptop is not
> one fifth full.
>
> Should defrag take this long in Vista?

Typically drives on laptops are slower that on destkop (5400 vs 7200
rpm) which would also cause defrag to run slower. There are commercial
defrag products such as Perfect Disk from Raxco that provide a number of
features not included in Vista's built in defrag tool. Whether not they
will be any faster depends on a number of factors, but you would have
more options over when the defrag runs, the type of defrag performed in
addition to feedback on progress.
--
Tom Porterfield
 
It does sound a long time. Can't make any sensible comments but I believe
vista's defrag is none to rapid. I understand from the MVPs out there that
vistas defrag is designed to run at scheduled times like 0200 hrs. Perhaps
that is MS's justification for the slow motion behaviour of vista's defrag.

Others before you have commented (complained) similarly.

If you want a defrag ute with a progress bar and pretty coloured disk
clusters to look at; try http://www.auslogics.com/disk-defrag/.

That goes pretty quick too.

--

Delboy

A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely
foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools.

Douglas Adams
"SK" <macross@boltblue.com> wrote in message
news:31DB971F-B3D5-4BF7-B63B-968D3B4AB3D3@microsoft.com...
> Hi is there a better way to defrag my hard drive with Vista? As I have
> noticed that the defrag utility in vista does not give detail or estimated
> time of completion unlike in XP an I had defrag running on my laptop for 5
> hours and on my desktop computer which is running XP and is slower and has
> more stuff on defrags quicker, ok my laptop has a 120GB hard drive and my
> desktop only has 80GB but currently my laptop is not one fifth full.
>
> Should defrag take this long in Vista?
>
>
> SK
 
SK wrote:
> Hi is there a better way to defrag my hard drive with Vista? As I have
> noticed that the defrag utility in vista does not give detail or
> estimated time of completion unlike in XP an I had defrag running on
> my laptop for 5 hours and on my desktop computer which is running XP
> and is slower and has more stuff on defrags quicker, ok my laptop has
> a 120GB hard drive and my desktop only has 80GB but currently my
> laptop is not one fifth full.
> Should defrag take this long in Vista?

Yet another "advanced" component in Vista... good GRIEF

Trust me, you'd be far better off with XP. Theres just no point in
getting on on Vista so early... I mean it's still in beta developement
and unless you want to be a beta tester I recommend going back to XP,
2000, or whatever you were using before if it worked well :)
 
The Auslogic free defragger has proven to be so reliable that I do not run
the windows defragger at all now. I use the Auslogics after a disk cleanup
once a week or so. Run CCleaner or Wise Disk Cleaner, then start the
Auslogics Defragger and go to lunch or such.

"Delboy" <spamfree.delboy.hoy@btinternet.com> wrote in message news:t_OdnZGh5uSeC1nb4p2dnAA@bt.com...
> It does sound a long time. Can't make any sensible comments but I believe
> vista's defrag is none to rapid. I understand from the MVPs out there that
> vistas defrag is designed to run at scheduled times like 0200 hrs. Perhaps
> that is MS's justification for the slow motion behaviour of vista's defrag.
>
> Others before you have commented (complained) similarly.
>
> If you want a defrag ute with a progress bar and pretty coloured disk
> clusters to look at; try http://www.auslogics.com/disk-defrag/.
>
> That goes pretty quick too.
>
> --
>
> Delboy
>
> A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely
> foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools.
>
> Douglas Adams
> "SK" <macross@boltblue.com> wrote in message
> news:31DB971F-B3D5-4BF7-B63B-968D3B4AB3D3@microsoft.com...
>> Hi is there a better way to defrag my hard drive with Vista? As I have
>> noticed that the defrag utility in vista does not give detail or estimated
>> time of completion unlike in XP an I had defrag running on my laptop for 5
>> hours and on my desktop computer which is running XP and is slower and has
>> more stuff on defrags quicker, ok my laptop has a 120GB hard drive and my
>> desktop only has 80GB but currently my laptop is not one fifth full.
>>
>> Should defrag take this long in Vista?
>>
>>
>> SK
>
 
"Swingman" <kac@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:0CFD556C-71E2-497F-BAB0-65E3325A1D50@microsoft.com...
> YMMV, but what I do is simply let it run in the background and ignore it.
> Vista seems to handle the chore with minimum fuss/no noticeable
> degradation of other tasks on this 2 GB Dell XPS 1210.

Yes, but I like to defrag manually when I choose and not when the OS decides
to do it. Only problem is I can't see the option to disable the defrag task
in Vista, all I can seem to do is change it's schedule. How do I disable
defrag task in Vista? It's scheduled to defrag my XP disks too which I
really don't want or need.
 
"Tom Porterfield" <tpporter@mvps.org> wrote in message
news:%237O0aJD4HHA.1204@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>
> Typically drives on laptops are slower that on destkop (5400 vs 7200 rpm)
> which would also cause defrag to run slower. There are commercial defrag
> products such as Perfect Disk from Raxco that provide a number of features
> not included in Vista's built in defrag tool. Whether not they will be
> any faster depends on a number of factors, but you would have more options
> over when the defrag runs, the type of defrag performed in addition to
> feedback on progress.
> --
> Tom Porterfield


Yea, I've used pretty much all of them and their claims of massive speed
improvements are snake oil. I've never noticed any improvement over the one
that comes with the OS. There is a reason Microsoft removed the feedback
from Vista defrag. The info provided was just eye candy and not accurate at
all. There is no need for the feedback unless you just like to play program
manager and watch the pretty blocks fall into place.
 
"Spirit" <noone@notthere.net> wrote in message
news:e0mxTOD4HHA.1484@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
The Auslogic free defragger has proven to be so reliable that I do not run
the windows defragger at all now. I use the Auslogics after a disk cleanup
once a week or so. Run CCleaner or Wise Disk Cleaner, then start the
Auslogics Defragger and go to lunch or such.


How do you disable the task scheduler for defrag in Vista? I still want to
use the Vista defrag but want to disable the scheduled task and run it
manually. I can't find the option to disable the task, all I see is how to
just change its frequency and time of running.
 
"Wayne M. Poe" <louisREMOVE@REMOVEh4h.com> wrote in message
news:5ijj4jF3p3iekU1@mid.individual.net...

>
> Trust me, you'd be far better off with XP. Theres just no point in getting
> on on Vista so early... I mean it's still in beta developement and unless
> you want to be a beta tester I recommend going back to XP, 2000, or
> whatever you were using before if it worked well :)
>


If that is your *opinion* then why are you even here? This group is for
Vista users and not Vista bashers. Screw off back to your XP group. Just so
you know, I dual boot both Vista64 and XP and plan to keep it that way.
Vista has a lot of benefits over XP so your comments are unwanted and
misguided.
 
"Wayne M. Poe" <louisREMOVE@REMOVEh4h.com> wrote in message
news:5ijj4jF3p3iekU1@mid.individual.net...

> Yet another "advanced" component in Vista... good GRIEF

It is, now normal people's machines will be getting defragged automatically
in the background.

Advanced users know enough to disable it and use any other tool they want.

> Trust me, you'd be far better off with XP. Theres just no point in getting
> on on Vista so early... I mean it's still in beta developement and unless
> you want to be a beta tester I recommend going back to XP, 2000, or
> whatever you were using before if it worked well :)

Windows Vista has been out of beta for a year, try and keep up.

--
Paul Smith,
Yeovil, UK.
Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User.
http://www.dasmirnov.net/blog/
http://www.windowsresource.net/

*Remove nospam. to reply by e-mail*
 
"Crazy Noddy" <SPAM@BLOCKER.ACTIVE> wrote in message
news:pT0xi.238636$hS7.220569@fe04.news.easynews.com...

> Yes, but I like to defrag manually when I choose and not when the OS
> decides to do it. Only problem is I can't see the option to disable the
> defrag task in Vista, all I can seem to do is change it's schedule. How do
> I disable defrag task in Vista? It's scheduled to defrag my XP disks too
> which I really don't want or need.

Just disable it in the Task Scheduler.

--
Paul Smith,
Yeovil, UK.
Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User.
http://www.dasmirnov.net/blog/
http://www.windowsresource.net/

*Remove nospam. to reply by e-mail*
 
Crazy Noddy wrote:
> "Wayne M. Poe" <louisREMOVE@REMOVEh4h.com> wrote in message
> news:5ijj4jF3p3iekU1@mid.individual.net...
>
>>
>> Trust me, you'd be far better off with XP. Theres just no point in
>> getting on on Vista so early... I mean it's still in beta
>> developement and unless you want to be a beta tester I recommend
>> going back to XP, 2000, or whatever you were using before if it
>> worked well :)
>
>
> This group is for Vista users and not Vista bashers.

It's Vista that provides virtually unlimited ammo, and just begs to have
the trigger pulled.

> Just so you know, I dual boot both Vista64 and XP and plan to
> keep it that way. Vista has a lot of benefits over XP so your
> comments are unwanted and misguided.

Give me a break. Vista is a mess. To many, what vista repreents is
"unwanted" and those who push it are "misguided" as what Vista really
is:

http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/vista_cost.html
 
Paul Smith wrote:
> "Wayne M. Poe" <louisREMOVE@REMOVEh4h.com> wrote in message
> news:5ijj4jF3p3iekU1@mid.individual.net...
>
>> Yet another "advanced" component in Vista... good GRIEF
>
> It is, now normal people's machines will be getting defragged
> automatically in the background.
>
> Advanced users know enough to disable it and use any other tool they
> want.
>> Trust me, you'd be far better off with XP. Theres just no point in
>> getting on on Vista so early... I mean it's still in beta
>> developement and unless you want to be a beta tester I recommend
>> going back to XP, 2000, or whatever you were using before if it
>> worked well :)
>
> Windows Vista has been out of beta for a year, try and keep up.

I was being sarcastic. Vista is beta quality. All the problems in this
news group are all the proof of that.
 
"Crazy Noddy" <SPAM@BLOCKER.ACTIVE> wrote in message
news:wZ0xi.29201$Fw7.1324@fe03.news.easynews.com...
> "Spirit" <noone@notthere.net> wrote in message
> news:e0mxTOD4HHA.1484@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> The Auslogic free defragger has proven to be so reliable that I do not
> run
> the windows defragger at all now. I use the Auslogics after a disk
> cleanup
> once a week or so. Run CCleaner or Wise Disk Cleaner, then start the
> Auslogics Defragger and go to lunch or such.
>
>
> How do you disable the task scheduler for defrag in Vista? I still
> want to use the Vista defrag but want to disable the scheduled task
> and run it manually. I can't find the option to disable the task, all
> I see is how to just change its frequency and time of running.
The switch is in the 'Actions' pane.
Just select the scheduled defrag in the Microsoft-Windows-Defrag section
and click on 'disable' in the 'Actions' pane.
Threre's a tool bar button to show the Actions pane if it's not visible.

Tom
 
Vista even though released is BETA Quality. If I put out software with so
many problems I'd lose my job. Microsoft can do what they want, throw
inferior software into production and have the masses test it. They had a
deadline and they met the deadline. Doesn't matter if they have 1000 bugs.
They could care less.


"Paul Smith" <Paul@nospam.windowsresource.net> wrote in message
news:esfKzaD4HHA.3900@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> "Wayne M. Poe" <louisREMOVE@REMOVEh4h.com> wrote in message
> news:5ijj4jF3p3iekU1@mid.individual.net...
>
>> Yet another "advanced" component in Vista... good GRIEF
>
> It is, now normal people's machines will be getting defragged
> automatically in the background.
>
> Advanced users know enough to disable it and use any other tool they want.
>
>> Trust me, you'd be far better off with XP. Theres just no point in
>> getting on on Vista so early... I mean it's still in beta developement
>> and unless you want to be a beta tester I recommend going back to XP,
>> 2000, or whatever you were using before if it worked well :)
>
> Windows Vista has been out of beta for a year, try and keep up.
>
> --
> Paul Smith,
> Yeovil, UK.
> Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User.
> http://www.dasmirnov.net/blog/
> http://www.windowsresource.net/
>
> *Remove nospam. to reply by e-mail*
>
>
 
"Wayne M. Poe" <louisREMOVE@REMOVEh4h.com> wrote in message
news:5ijlk5F3o187bU1@mid.individual.net...

> Give me a break. Vista is a mess. To many, what vista repreents is
> "unwanted" and those who push it are "misguided" as what Vista really is:

Which I already debunked last year:

http://www.dasmirnov.net/blog/2006/12/31/windows_vista_drm_nonsense

And have recently given examples of people doing things he claims is
impossible:

http://www.dasmirnov.net/blog/2007/08/14/peter_gutmann_s_vista_drm_claims_again

Don't you have anything that is 1) fresh and new, or 2) actually exists in
the real world?

--
Paul Smith,
Yeovil, UK.
Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User.
http://www.dasmirnov.net/blog/
http://www.windowsresource.net/

*Remove nospam. to reply by e-mail*
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top