Sent: 12/16/2008
From: "Steve Jain [MVP]" <(email address - cut out)>
Message:On Wed, 17 Dec 2008 07:16:19 +0100, Bo Berglund <(email address - cut out)>
wrote:
Diskkeeper.
MS believes that the auto defrag in Vista requires no user overview or
intervention.
I've been using Diskkeeper for Vista, you still get the graphical
displays.
--
Cheers,
Steve Jain, Virtual Machine MVP
http://vpc.essjae.com/
Show quoted text
>On Wed, 17 Dec 2008 00:03:58 -0000, "Mark Rae [MVP]"
><(email address - cut out)> wrote:
>
>>"Bo Berglund" <(email address - cut out)> wrote in message
>>news:(email address - cut out)...
>>
>>> Any ideas where it can be found?
>>
>>Start, Programs, Accessories, System Tools, Disk Defragmenter
>
>Strange, it seems to offer no view of the current state like the XP
>defragger does (Analyze and show graphically the situation).
>How can I see how bad my disk is fragmented?
Sent: 12/17/2008
From: "Mark Rae [MVP]" <(email address - cut out)>
Message:"Bo Berglund" <(email address - cut out)> wrote in message
news:(email address - cut out)...
Start, Programs, Accessories, System Tools, Disk Defragmenter
--
Mark Rae
ASP.NET MVP
http://www.markrae.net
Show quoted text
> Any ideas where it can be found?
Sent: 12/17/2008
From: Anonymous Sender <(email address - cut out)>
Message:In article <(email address - cut out)>
Bo Berglund <(email address - cut out)> wrote:
Type defrag into the Vista search just above the start button.
Show quoted text
>
> I was going to defragment the Vista Ultimate guest disk in preparation
> to running the precompactor.
> But I could not find the defragmenter where it usually resides in my
> XP systems... I am new to Vista (only have it in my virtual
> environment) so I might have overlooked something.
> I used Administrative Tools/Computer Management as usual and intended
> to then go to the Defragment item in the list, but it was not there.
> Any ideas where it can be found?
>
Sent: 12/17/2008
From: DevilsPGD <(email address - cut out)>
Message:In message <(email address - cut out)> Bo Berglund
<(email address - cut out)> was claimed to have wrote:
Open an administrative command prompt and type "defrag c: -a" to see an
analysis of the drive.
Show quoted text
>On Wed, 17 Dec 2008 00:03:58 -0000, "Mark Rae [MVP]"
><(email address - cut out)> wrote:
>
>>"Bo Berglund" <(email address - cut out)> wrote in message
>>news:(email address - cut out)...
>>
>>> Any ideas where it can be found?
>>
>>Start, Programs, Accessories, System Tools, Disk Defragmenter
>
>Strange, it seems to offer no view of the current state like the XP
>defragger does (Analyze and show graphically the situation).
>How can I see how bad my disk is fragmented?
Sent: 12/17/2008
From: Bo Berglund <(email address - cut out)>
Message:On Wed, 17 Dec 2008 00:03:58 -0000, "Mark Rae [MVP]"
<(email address - cut out)> wrote:
Strange, it seems to offer no view of the current state like the XP
defragger does (Analyze and show graphically the situation).
How can I see how bad my disk is fragmented?
--
Bo Berglund (Sweden)
Show quoted text
>"Bo Berglund" <(email address - cut out)> wrote in message
>news:(email address - cut out)...
>
>> Any ideas where it can be found?
>
>Start, Programs, Accessories, System Tools, Disk Defragmenter
Sent: 12/17/2008
From: "Mark Rae [MVP]" <(email address - cut out)>
Message:"Bo Berglund" <(email address - cut out)> wrote in message
news:(email address - cut out)...
That's right.
Use another defragmentation solution...
--
Mark Rae
ASP.NET MVP
http://www.markrae.net
Show quoted text
> Strange, it seems to offer no view of the current state like the XP
> defragger does (Analyze and show graphically the situation).
> How can I see how bad my disk is fragmented?
Sent: 12/17/2008
From: "Bill Grant" <not.available@online>
Message:
"Bo Berglund" <(email address - cut out)> wrote in message
news:(email address - cut out)...
It is still there. It usually runs automatically, but you can alter it.
Type defrag into the search bar in the start menu.
Show quoted text
> I was going to defragment the Vista Ultimate guest disk in preparation
> to running the precompactor.
> But I could not find the defragmenter where it usually resides in my
> XP systems... I am new to Vista (only have it in my virtual
> environment) so I might have overlooked something.
> I used Administrative Tools/Computer Management as usual and intended
> to then go to the Defragment item in the list, but it was not there.
> Any ideas where it can be found?
>
> --
>
> Bo Berglund (Sweden)
Sent: 12/17/2008
From: DevilsPGD <(email address - cut out)>
Message:In message <(email address - cut out)> Bo Berglund
<(email address - cut out)> was claimed to have wrote:
Correct. Even on my fairly small 500GB drive I have 122096127 total
allocation units on disk, which is more pixels then my 24" 1920x1200
monitor can display.
The graphic hasn't meant anything for a long time as even if you had a
small enough drive to fit within the number of pixels on your screen,
XP's drive map didn't use 1 pixel images.
With 1% fragmentation you don't need to defragment, so move on to the
next step.
You can get more info by adding -v to the end of the command line:
Windows Disk Defragmenter
Copyright (c) 2006 Microsoft Corp.
Analysis report for volume F: 750GB
Volume size = 699 GB
Cluster size = 4 KB
Used space = 540 GB
Free space = 159 GB
Percent free space = 22 %
File fragmentation
Percent file fragmentation = 0 %
Total movable files = 3,578
Average file size = 122 MB
Total fragmented files = 6
Total excess fragments = 144
Average fragments per file = 1.04
Total unmovable files = 12
Free space fragmentation
Free space = 159 GB
Total free space extent = 2,351
Average free space per extent = 69 MB
Largest free space extent = 28.03 GB
Folder fragmentation
Total folders = 203
Fragmented folders = 1
Excess folder fragments = 0
Master File Table (MFT) fragmentation
Total MFT size = 8 MB
MFT record count = 3,707
Percent MFT in use = 43
Total MFT fragments = 3
Note: On NTFS volumes, file fragments larger than 64MB are not
included in the fragmentation statistics
You do not need to defragment this volume.
Show quoted text
>On Wed, 17 Dec 2008 01:50:35 -0800, DevilsPGD
><(email address - cut out)> wrote:
>
>>In message <(email address - cut out)> Bo Berglund
>><(email address - cut out)> was claimed to have wrote:
>>
>>>On Wed, 17 Dec 2008 00:03:58 -0000, "Mark Rae [MVP]"
>>><(email address - cut out)> wrote:
>>>
>>>>"Bo Berglund" <(email address - cut out)> wrote in message
>>>>news:(email address - cut out)...
>>>>
>>>>> Any ideas where it can be found?
>>>>
>>>>Start, Programs, Accessories, System Tools, Disk Defragmenter
>>>
>>>Strange, it seems to offer no view of the current state like the XP
>>>defragger does (Analyze and show graphically the situation).
>>>How can I see how bad my disk is fragmented?
>>
>>Open an administrative command prompt and type "defrag c: -a" to see an
>>analysis of the drive.
>
>No graphics view, just this bare text:
>
>C:\Windows\system32>defrag c: -a
>Windows Disk Defragmenter
>Copyright (c) 2006 Microsoft Corp.
>
>Analysis report for volume C:
>
> Volume size = 64.00 GB
> Free space = 46.00 GB
> Largest free space extent = 23.40 GB
> Percent file fragmentation = 1 %
>
> Note: On NTFS volumes, file fragments larger than 64MB are not
>included in the fragmentation statistics
>
> You do not need to defragment this volume.
>
>What an improvement from XP!
Sent: 12/17/2008
From: "Mark Rae [MVP]" <(email address - cut out)>
Message:"Bo Berglund" <(email address - cut out)> wrote in message
news:(email address - cut out)...
That's right.
Also correct.
It certainly is! All of the graphical eye candy in XP added no value
whatsoever to the process of defragging, other than to waste processor
cycles...
--
Mark Rae
ASP.NET MVP
http://www.markrae.net
Show quoted text
>> Open an administrative command prompt and type "defrag c: -a" to see an
>> analysis of the drive.
> No graphics view, just this bare text:
> Note: On NTFS volumes, file fragments larger than 64MB are not
> included in the fragmentation statistics
> What an improvement from XP!
Sent: 12/17/2008
From: Bo Berglund <(email address - cut out)>
Message:On Wed, 17 Dec 2008 01:50:35 -0800, DevilsPGD
<(email address - cut out)> wrote:
No graphics view, just this bare text:
C:\Windows\system32>defrag c: -a
Windows Disk Defragmenter
Copyright (c) 2006 Microsoft Corp.
Analysis report for volume C:
Volume size = 64.00 GB
Free space = 46.00 GB
Largest free space extent = 23.40 GB
Percent file fragmentation = 1 %
Note: On NTFS volumes, file fragments larger than 64MB are not
included in the fragmentation statistics
You do not need to defragment this volume.
What an improvement from XP!
--
Bo Berglund (Sweden)
Show quoted text
>In message <(email address - cut out)> Bo Berglund
><(email address - cut out)> was claimed to have wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 17 Dec 2008 00:03:58 -0000, "Mark Rae [MVP]"
>><(email address - cut out)> wrote:
>>
>>>"Bo Berglund" <(email address - cut out)> wrote in message
>>>news:(email address - cut out)...
>>>
>>>> Any ideas where it can be found?
>>>
>>>Start, Programs, Accessories, System Tools, Disk Defragmenter
>>
>>Strange, it seems to offer no view of the current state like the XP
>>defragger does (Analyze and show graphically the situation).
>>How can I see how bad my disk is fragmented?
>
>Open an administrative command prompt and type "defrag c: -a" to see an
>analysis of the drive.
Sent: 12/18/2008
From: Benjamin <(email address - cut out)>
Message:
'Steve Jain [MVP Wrote:
I too use Diskeeper 2009 (just upgraded) on Vista, and it's got the GU
and drive map. Defrags much faster than the Vista defragger too
--
Benjamin
Show quoted text
> ;912714']On Wed, 17 Dec 2008 07:16:19 +0100, Bo Berglun
> <boberglund@xxxxxx>
> wrote:
> > > >
> > >On Wed, 17 Dec 2008 00:03:58 -0000, "Mark Rae [MVP]"
> > ><mark@xxxxxx> wrote:
> > >> > > > >
> > > >>"Bo Berglund" <boberglund@xxxxxx> wrote in message
> > > >>news:ogegk41ndpq48ag5gmpbngkuk917cp8d2s@xxxxxx
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>Start, Programs, Accessories, System Tools, Disk Defragmenter> > > >
> > >
> > >Strange, it seems to offer no view of the current state like th
> > XP
> > >defragger does (Analyze and show graphically the situation).
> > >How can I see how bad my disk is fragmented? > >
>
> Diskkeeper.
> MS believes that the auto defrag in Vista requires no user overvie
> or
> intervention.
> I've been using Diskkeeper for Vista, you still get the graphical
> displays.
>
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Steve Jain, Virtual Machine MVP
> 'esSJae.com Virtual Machine Downloads' (http://vpc.essjae.com/)
Sent: 12/30/2008
From: DevilsPGD <(email address - cut out)>
Message:In message <(email address - cut out)>
(email address - cut out) was claimed to have wrote:
Yup. Running IE7 in protected mode, and enforcing limited user
privileges in other applications is all graphical eye candy.
Of course when it comes to eye candy, Aero manages to offload work over
to the otherwise all-but-used GPU, so Aero is actually using less CPU
then XP in many cases.
But don't worry about letting those pesky facts while you're busy having
a good rant, 'eh?
Show quoted text
>But isn't that what Vista is all about -- graphical eye candy added to
>XP that wastes processor cycles?
Sent: 12/30/2008
From: (email address - cut out)
Message:Mark Rae [MVP] wrote:
But isn't that what Vista is all about -- graphical eye candy added to
XP that wastes processor cycles?
Bob
Show quoted text
> "Bo Berglund" <(email address - cut out)> wrote in message
> news:(email address - cut out)...
>
>>> Open an administrative command prompt and type "defrag c: -a" to see an
>>> analysis of the drive.
>
>> No graphics view, just this bare text:
>
> That's right.
>
>> Note: On NTFS volumes, file fragments larger than 64MB are not
>> included in the fragmentation statistics
>
> Also correct.
>
>> What an improvement from XP!
>
> It certainly is! All of the graphical eye candy in XP added no value
> whatsoever to the process of defragging, other than to waste processor
> cycles...
>
>
Sent: 12/30/2008
From: "Mark Rae [MVP]" <(email address - cut out)>
Message:<(email address - cut out)> wrote in message
news:(email address - cut out)...
No.
--
Mark Rae
ASP.NET MVP
http://www.markrae.net
Show quoted text
>>> What an improvement from XP!
>>
>> It certainly is! All of the graphical eye candy in XP added no value
>> whatsoever to the process of defragging, other than to waste processor
>> cycles...
>>
>>
> But isn't that what Vista is all about -- graphical eye candy added to XP
> that wastes processor cycles?
Sent: 12/30/2008
From: DevilsPGD <(email address - cut out)>
Message:In message <(email address - cut out)> "Mark Rae [MVP]"
<(email address - cut out)> was claimed to have wrote:
But it makes a better rant to whine about eye candy -- And in fairness
with a subpar video card and transparency, the end result may be slower
then turning Aero off since most CPUs aren't all that busy most of the
time anyway.
I'm a little disappointed that Microsoft didn't make
Aero-without-transparency a more obvious choice, and put the wording
around the non-Aero themes to indicate it's for under powered machines
or something similar that would embarrass the gamer types out of using
it.
Yup. It took well past XP SP2's release before a lot of the naysayers
moved over. I stuck it out with 2000 myself until XP SP2.
I'm not seeing that one, 7 is coming out too quickly, the good 'ol days
will still be XP. Shame, but a necessary one to get MS' OS release
schedule back up to speed, and so such is Vista's fate.
Show quoted text
>"DevilsPGD" <(email address - cut out)> wrote in message
>news:(email address - cut out)...
>
>> Of course when it comes to eye candy, Aero manages to offload work over
>> to the otherwise all-but-used GPU, so Aero is actually using less CPU
>> then XP in many cases.
>
>Correct.
>> But don't worry about letting those pesky facts while you're busy having
>> a good rant, 'eh?
>
>Indeed. It always makes you look cool and hard to have a pop at the latest
>MS OS - exactly the same phenomenon was noted when XP was first released.
>When Vienna (or whatever it ends up being called) comes out next year,
>expect a slew of posts saying how crap it is and can't we have good ol'
>Vista back, etc...
Sent: 12/30/2008
From: "Mark Rae [MVP]" <(email address - cut out)>
Message:"DevilsPGD" <(email address - cut out)> wrote in message
news:(email address - cut out)...
Correct.
Indeed. It always makes you look cool and hard to have a pop at the latest
MS OS - exactly the same phenomenon was noted when XP was first released.
When Vienna (or whatever it ends up being called) comes out next year,
expect a slew of posts saying how crap it is and can't we have good ol'
Vista back, etc...
--
Mark Rae
ASP.NET MVP
http://www.markrae.net
Show quoted text
> Of course when it comes to eye candy, Aero manages to offload work over
> to the otherwise all-but-used GPU, so Aero is actually using less CPU
> then XP in many cases.
> But don't worry about letting those pesky facts while you're busy having
> a good rant, 'eh?
Wiki