Main Area and Open Discussion > General Software Discussion
XP or Vista user — take the poll!
f0dder:
And defrag, how does it work without meters? Like Scandisk in XP?
-Lashiec (September 16, 2007, 09:23 PM)
--- End quote ---
There's no "scandisk" in XP, only chkdsk... and chkdsk, while being a console app, does have progress meters... (oh yeah, there's the graphical tool on drive property sheet as well, and even that has a progress bar).
Defrag in Vista simply says "defragmenting your drive, this may take between a couple of minutes and a couple of hours" and lets you cancel... but has no progress indication whatsoever (appearantly there's still a console-mode version with a bit of progress indication though, but I haven't checked that).
Lashiec:
Ahem, well, the thing that we used to call Scandisk :)
A friend told me a few days ago that Vista has this background defragging feature, so that's maybe why they removed all MMC-related code, and left a barebones version. Oh, well, we have JKDefrag anyway :D
f0dder:
Afaik you can schedule the standard XP defrag as well, so it's no excuse for removing the interface in Crapsta... I wonder if it's the general "users are dumb" attitude, or to let other people at the defrag market more easily...
bugis:
IMHO, Vista's defrag is a mixed bag...it uses fewer resources than XP's defragger even though it runs in the background most of the time, so that's a plus; but on the other hand it never seems to finish what it set out to do, unlike third party defraggers. I personally like automatic defragmentation in general because once you set it up it autodefragments intelligently, and you usually don't have to bother with manual defrag jobs, setting schedules, worry about a schedule running during a busy time etc., So, the philosophy behind the Vista defrag is not wrong per se, it's just that it doesn't deliver the results expected. Who knows, maybe MS will fix it down the line via an update or in SP1.
Armando:
I personally like automatic defragmentation in general because once you set it up it autodefragments intelligently, and you usually don't have to bother with manual defrag jobs, setting schedules, worry about a schedule running during a busy time etc.,
-bugis (September 17, 2007, 01:47 PM)
--- End quote ---
One potential problem with constant automatic defrag is if you use an imaging technology as part of your backup system. Acronis true Image, for instance, won't be able to use the advantages of differential/incremental backups after defragmentation (i.e. Incremental image will be as big as the first one). If you manually defragment, you can decide to only do it once every 2 months or so and still use incremental imaging...
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version