Welcome to Vista Banter. You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions, articles and access our other FREE features. By joining our free community you will have access to ask questions and reply to others posts, upload your own photos and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today! If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact support. |
|
Windows Vista File Management Issues or questions in relation to Vista's file management. (microsoft.public.windows.vista.file_management) |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|||
[Defragmentation] Feature request!
"Ronnie Vernon MVP" wrote in message ... "NetLink_Blue" wrote in message ... So defrag never changed from Win98 up until Vista? What a shill you are Exactly where did you see me say this? You implied this ... ( reader can go back and read/judge for himself what Ronnie snipped out). Your definition of a shill is probably "someone who says something that I don't agree with." At least have the intelluctual honesty to admit it was just a judgement call by MS. Maybe Microsoft decided to just let users buy/support the third-party market for defrag if they wanted some anime. It was not a 'judgement call', it was in response to people who actually use the operating system, and who don't want to be bothered with mundane maintenance processes that take up time and resources. The links you provide below have some really great technical insights into Vista's defrag. And value-judgement reasons for changes. Microsoft listening to users? MS does whatever it damn well pleases. With monstrous hard-drive capacities appearing everywhere -- sure, a new defrag implementation is a must. So finally MS and (some?) Windows users are in sync about something. Don't break your arm patting yourself & MS on the back, Ronnie. :~) What part of a 'low priority 'background process' do you not understand? ( you're sounding SHRILL on this reply ) What part of a completely new defrag algorithm do you not understand? ( darn ... you sure can get SHRILL ) /// Net blue The Storage Team at Microsoft - File Cabinet Blog : Don’t judge a book by its cover – why Windows Vista Defrag is cool: http://blogs.technet.com/filecab/arc...g-is-cool.aspx The Storage Team at Microsoft - File Cabinet Blog : Disk Defragmenter FAQ: http://blogs.technet.com/filecab/articles/440717.aspx -- Ronnie Vernon Microsoft MVP Windows Desktop Experience |
|
|||
[Defragmentation] Feature request!
Ha!
You sure can 'read' a lot more into a message than what was intended. Your perceptions about what I posted say much more about 'you' than it does about me. -- Ronnie Vernon Microsoft MVP Windows Desktop Experience "NetLink_Blue" wrote in message ... "Ronnie Vernon MVP" wrote in message ... "NetLink_Blue" wrote in message ... So defrag never changed from Win98 up until Vista? What a shill you are Exactly where did you see me say this? You implied this ... ( reader can go back and read/judge for himself what Ronnie snipped out). Your definition of a shill is probably "someone who says something that I don't agree with." At least have the intelluctual honesty to admit it was just a judgement call by MS. Maybe Microsoft decided to just let users buy/support the third-party market for defrag if they wanted some anime. It was not a 'judgement call', it was in response to people who actually use the operating system, and who don't want to be bothered with mundane maintenance processes that take up time and resources. The links you provide below have some really great technical insights into Vista's defrag. And value-judgement reasons for changes. Microsoft listening to users? MS does whatever it damn well pleases. With monstrous hard-drive capacities appearing everywhere -- sure, a new defrag implementation is a must. So finally MS and (some?) Windows users are in sync about something. Don't break your arm patting yourself & MS on the back, Ronnie. :~) What part of a 'low priority 'background process' do you not understand? ( you're sounding SHRILL on this reply ) What part of a completely new defrag algorithm do you not understand? ( darn ... you sure can get SHRILL ) /// Net blue The Storage Team at Microsoft - File Cabinet Blog : Don’t judge a book by its cover – why Windows Vista Defrag is cool: http://blogs.technet.com/filecab/arc...g-is-cool.aspx The Storage Team at Microsoft - File Cabinet Blog : Disk Defragmenter FAQ: http://blogs.technet.com/filecab/articles/440717.aspx -- Ronnie Vernon Microsoft MVP Windows Desktop Experience |
|
|||
[Defragmentation] Feature request!
"Even if it did have a progress bar, they're very rarely accurate"
So what. At least it would give a rough idea of the progress of the defrag. "Paul Smith" wrote: "Markus Emayr" essmayr/at/racon-linz.at wrote in message ... Hello to the defragmentation-tool-developer-team, please please add some progress information to the tool. Thanks very much! The built-in defragmenter is very much more of a background process, most users won't ever open the UI. Even if it did have a progress bar, they're very rarely accurate. -- 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* |
|
|||
[Defragmentation] Feature request!
The Vista defragmenter normally runs when needed in the background.
"Avery Tom Deacon Harry" wrote in message ... "Even if it did have a progress bar, they're very rarely accurate" So what. At least it would give a rough idea of the progress of the defrag. "Paul Smith" wrote: "Markus Emayr" essmayr/at/racon-linz.at wrote in message ... Hello to the defragmentation-tool-developer-team, please please add some progress information to the tool. Thanks very much! The built-in defragmenter is very much more of a background process, most users won't ever open the UI. Even if it did have a progress bar, they're very rarely accurate. -- 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* |
|
|||
[Defragmentation] Feature request!
"Avery Tom Deacon Harry" wrote in message ... "Even if it did have a progress bar, they're very rarely accurate" So what. At least it would give a rough idea of the progress of the defrag. The progress bar would have to be made to show backward progress! Don't forget, one aspect of Vista's "invisible" constant defrag operation is quietly and slowing running in the background all the time. After several hours of normal Vista use, my "other" defrag program shows the results of Vista's digital confetti parade. A couple hundred fragmented files. Since I don't leave my computer powered up all the time, there isn't enough quiet time for Vista's background "turtle" defrag to trudge thru and pick up all the picnic scraps. For this aspect of defrag, a progress bar doesn't make sense. And yes, my "other" defrag program has the option to respect layout.ini mapping that Vista creates for file/hard-drive spiffiness. Microsoft ( for whatever reason ) has decided to remove defrag consciousness from Vista users as much as possible. digital mysteries, magnetic domains ... netlink = - = - = "Paul Smith" wrote: "Markus Emayr" essmayr/at/racon-linz.at wrote in message ... Hello to the defragmentation-tool-developer-team, please please add some progress information to the tool. Thanks very much! The built-in defragmenter is very much more of a background process, most users won't ever open the UI. Even if it did have a progress bar, they're very rarely accurate. -- 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* |
|
|||
[Defragmentation] Feature request!
Peoples memories are so short. Defrag in Windows 95/98 was abysmal. That is
why everyone in the know used a third party defragger. With Vista it is no longer necessary. -- Richard Urban Microsoft MVP Windows Desktop Experience "Ronnie Vernon MVP" wrote in message ... The problem is that it 'was' broke. Have you forgotten that you could not do anything else on the system while defrag was running without having it start all over again? Have you forgotten that it stayed at 0% forever? Or when it finally did start, it jumped to 10% and then stayed there forever? The progress bar was never a reliable indicator of the actual progress. This is why it was completely rebuilt to run as a low priority background process, that you never see and never need to worry about. -- Ronnie Vernon Microsoft MVP Windows Desktop Experience "Avery Tom Deacon Harry" wrote in message ... I just read ALL this discussion and see that nobody has made the simple point that EVERY other Vista application that takes time to complete has a progress bar, Internet Explorer for instance. The Win98 defrag tool had a progress bar (one could also see details of the defrag as well if one wanted), and its scandisc had a progress monitor as well. So the point one really needs to get MS to understand is "if it ain't broke then don't fix it". Give me my progress display back in defrag and scandisc, and I want the scandisc options back as well. "NetLink_Blue" wrote: "Richard Urban" wrote in message ... snip Again, unless a person is anal and gets turned on by watching little colors move around there is no reason to have a display - as long as the job gets done. I know what you mean, gerbil-butt. Windows and it's silly GUI have all these icons, colors and window-frames that can be endlessly resized and moved around. No wonder the U.S. economy is going into the tank. Jobs are not getting done. But, some people like to watch grass grow and paint dry also! Say hi to your Mom & Dad for me ... Visible clusters and sectors to all, netlink b |