Hi i am writing after i have just installed the new service pack 2 for
windows vista and am just trying to suggest that with the disk defragmenter,
as there isnt a lot that has been changed like the only things that have been
changed are that you can now select volums to defrag. one thing that may help
with this is to put a small graph (or GUI) similar to the windows xp one on
it and maybe a timer if possible so that people know how long it is going to
roughly be until it finishes, and a report message say as again in the
previous version telling what amount of fragmentation there is and what files
are fragmented. also another thing that i have noticed with vista is that it
takes up a lot of memory and if possible would there be any chance of trying
to make sure that vista uses less memory so that it can be more responsive.
These sugestions are from over the internet that people would like to see
happen as it would aid me and other people.

----------------
This post is a suggestion for Microsoft, and Microsoft responds to the
suggestions with the most votes. To vote for this suggestion, click the "I
Agree" button in the message pane. If you do not see the button, follow this
link to open the suggestion in the Microsoft Web-based Newsreader and then
click "I Agree" in the message pane.

http://windowshelp.microsoft.com/com...ce_maintenance

"ryan101" wrote in message
...
Hi i am writing after i have just installed the new service pack 2 for
windows vista
There ISN'T a "service pack 2" - SP1 has only just been released!

Apparently the defragmenter GUI was removed because people didn't want to
see it. However, now that its gone many people want it back.

An alternative defragmenting application is Auslogic Disk Defrag which is
free. you might like to try that. http://www.auslogics.com/disk-defrag

--

--
John Barnett MVP
Associate Expert
Windows Desktop Experience

Web: http://xphelpandsupport.mvps.org
Web: http://vistasupport.mvps.org

The information in this mail/post is supplied "as is". No warranty of any
kind, either expressed or implied, is made in relation to the accuracy,
reliability or content of this mail/post. The Author shall not be liable for
any direct, indirect, incidental or consequential damages arising out of the
use of, or inability to use, information or opinions expressed in this
mail/post..


"ryan101" wrote in message
...
Hi i am writing after i have just installed the new service pack 2 for
windows vista and am just trying to suggest that with the disk
defragmenter,
as there isnt a lot that has been changed like the only things that have
been
changed are that you can now select volums to defrag. one thing that may
help
with this is to put a small graph (or GUI) similar to the windows xp one
on
it and maybe a timer if possible so that people know how long it is going
to
roughly be until it finishes, and a report message say as again in the
previous version telling what amount of fragmentation there is and what
files
are fragmented. also another thing that i have noticed with vista is that
it
takes up a lot of memory and if possible would there be any chance of
trying
to make sure that vista uses less memory so that it can be more
responsive.
These sugestions are from over the internet that people would like to see
happen as it would aid me and other people.

----------------
This post is a suggestion for Microsoft, and Microsoft responds to the
suggestions with the most votes. To vote for this suggestion, click the "I
Agree" button in the message pane. If you do not see the button, follow
this
link to open the suggestion in the Microsoft Web-based Newsreader and then
click "I Agree" in the message pane.

http://windowshelp.microsoft.com/com...ce_maintenance

"John Barnett MVP" wrote in
:

Apparently the defragmenter GUI was removed because people didn't want
to see it.

What people wanted it removed? I've never seen anyone say they wanted it
removed. This was purely a Microsoft decision to dumb it down for the
masses and not something anyone asked for. All they had to do was to make
the GUI optional to make everyone happy.

When Microsoft remove something it is generally because a 'polled' selection
of users have offered their opinion. This is no different to the procedure
for 'any' opinion poll, whether it be about the Government of the day or
whether Kids should be given more pocket money.

In this instance the 'polled' selection, obviously, didn't find the GUI
useful. Personally, I don't; who wants to watch strips of colour move from
one end of a graph to another for the best part of an hour or more, I
certainly don't, but then I wasn't asked about the GUI either.


--

--
John Barnett MVP
Associate Expert
Windows Desktop Experience

Web: http://xphelpandsupport.mvps.org
Web: http://vistasupport.mvps.org

The information in this mail/post is supplied "as is". No warranty of any
kind, either expressed or implied, is made in relation to the accuracy,
reliability or content of this mail/post. The Author shall not be liable for
any direct, indirect, incidental or consequential damages arising out of the
use of, or inability to use, information or opinions expressed in this
mail/post..


"The Coward Robert Ford" wrote in message
news:Rbb6k.11370$kx.4288@pd7urf3no...
"John Barnett MVP" wrote in
:

Apparently the defragmenter GUI was removed because people didn't want
to see it.

What people wanted it removed? I've never seen anyone say they wanted it
removed. This was purely a Microsoft decision to dumb it down for the
masses and not something anyone asked for. All they had to do was to make
the GUI optional to make everyone happy.

John, some of us actually turn our computers OFF.
That is why people want to see where it is up to during Defrag!
NOT to look at the pretty lines!
There was a practical reason to have it!!
--
Mick Murphy - Qld - Australia


"John Barnett MVP" wrote:

When Microsoft remove something it is generally because a 'polled' selection
of users have offered their opinion. This is no different to the procedure
for 'any' opinion poll, whether it be about the Government of the day or
whether Kids should be given more pocket money.

In this instance the 'polled' selection, obviously, didn't find the GUI
useful. Personally, I don't; who wants to watch strips of colour move from
one end of a graph to another for the best part of an hour or more, I
certainly don't, but then I wasn't asked about the GUI either.


--

--
John Barnett MVP
Associate Expert
Windows Desktop Experience

Web: http://xphelpandsupport.mvps.org
Web: http://vistasupport.mvps.org

The information in this mail/post is supplied "as is". No warranty of any
kind, either expressed or implied, is made in relation to the accuracy,
reliability or content of this mail/post. The Author shall not be liable for
any direct, indirect, incidental or consequential damages arising out of the
use of, or inability to use, information or opinions expressed in this
mail/post..


"The Coward Robert Ford" wrote in message
news:Rbb6k.11370$kx.4288@pd7urf3no...
"John Barnett MVP" wrote in
:

Apparently the defragmenter GUI was removed because people didn't want
to see it.

What people wanted it removed? I've never seen anyone say they wanted it
removed. This was purely a Microsoft decision to dumb it down for the
masses and not something anyone asked for. All they had to do was to make
the GUI optional to make everyone happy.

one thing that may help
with this is to put a small graph (or GUI) similar to the windows xp one
on
it and maybe a timer if possible so that people know how long it is going
to
roughly be until it finishes, and a report message say as again in the
previous version telling what amount of fragmentation there is and what
files
are fragmented.

No, and no again. This has been done to death already, and I believe MS
have got this one right. They point out that it simply isn't possible to
give an accurate or meaningful GUI, because there aren't enough pixels on
the display. Nor is a "pretty" or "pleasing" end picture - with all the
blue bars crammed up to one end - a good indication of whether the disk is
actually optimised for speed and future resistance to fragmentation.

Also, you should never need to run it manually anyway. It runs
automatically every week, and all the INFORMED opinion (as opposed to the
ill-informed prejudices of our resident trolls) is that you can, and should,
just leave it to its own devices.

In other words, FORGET about fragmentation. Let the built-in defragger do
its job - which it will.

SteveT

John, some of us actually turn our computers OFF.

Defragging starts up automatically when you turn it on again. You really
don't need to monitor it at all - it looks after itself just fine.

SteveT

"John Barnett MVP" wrote in
:

When Microsoft remove something it is generally because a 'polled'
selection of users have offered their opinion. This is no different to
the procedure for 'any' opinion poll, whether it be about the
Government of the day or whether Kids should be given more pocket
money.

In this instance the 'polled' selection, obviously, didn't find the
GUI useful. Personally, I don't; who wants to watch strips of colour
move from one end of a graph to another for the best part of an hour
or more, I certainly don't, but then I wasn't asked about the GUI
either.



Well, they should stop polling Joe Average and ask people who use computers
all day every day for their opion first. Geeks like watching the HDD
defragment, gets their blood flowing.

"Steve Thackery" wrote in
:

No, and no again. This has been done to death already, and I believe
MS have got this one right. They point out that it simply isn't
possible to give an accurate or meaningful GUI, because there aren't
enough pixels on the display. Nor is a "pretty" or "pleasing" end
picture - with all the blue bars crammed up to one end - a good
indication of whether the disk is actually optimised for speed and
future resistance to fragmentation.

Also, you should never need to run it manually anyway. It runs
automatically every week, and all the INFORMED opinion (as opposed to
the ill-informed prejudices of our resident trolls) is that you can,
and should, just leave it to its own devices.

In other words, FORGET about fragmentation. Let the built-in
defragger do its job - which it will.

SteveT


The 3rd party defragges are pretty accurate about how far in the defrag
job it is. If it says 80% finished they are about right. Give us both and
then you won't get threads like this. Don't please one camp and **** off
another.