disk defragmentor

[Pepperoni]

My disk defragmetor keeps running in a loop and I have tried everything i can
and nothing seems to be working. So, if you have any help to offer please
tell me.

 

[glee]

Have a look here, by MS MVP Ron Badour:
http://home.satx.rr.com/badour/html/scandisk.html
and
http://home.satx.rr.com/badour/html/defrag.html

One simple workaround is to start in Safe Mode, and then run Defrag from there.

Here are a couple of little utilities to automate it for you:

ScanDefrag
http://www.blueorbsoft.com/scandefrag/
or
GEODisk
http://dundats.mvps.org/Software/Index.htm

--
Glen Ventura, MS MVP Windows, A+
http://dts-l.net/
http://dts-l.net/goodpost.htm


"Pepperoni" <Pepperoni@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:CE574FD5-CC58-4D0C-99B0-EECFFA1C7BC0@microsoft.com...
> My disk defragmetor keeps running in a loop and I have tried everything i can
> and nothing seems to be working. So, if you have any help to offer please
> tell me.

 

[Gary S. Terhune]

"Clean Boot -- What it is and why you need it"
http://www.grystmill.com/articles/cleanboot.htm
--
Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User
www.grystmill.com

"Pepperoni" <Pepperoni@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:CE574FD5-CC58-4D0C-99B0-EECFFA1C7BC0@microsoft.com...
> My disk defragmetor keeps running in a loop and I have tried everything i
> can
> and nothing seems to be working. So, if you have any help to offer please
> tell me.

 

[Peter Keller]

Pepperoni wrote:
> My disk defragmetor keeps running in a loop and I have tried everything i can
> and nothing seems to be working. So, if you have any help to offer please
> tell me.


Here is an old Vic Ferri trick that I saved. Make sure you know how to
edit system.ini when you reboot. If you copy system.ini to your root drive,
and put a line in your autoexec.bat file to copy it back it will
automate the
process.(copy C:\system.ini C:\windows.) Comment out the line after you
reboot.

>Power Defrag is very popular but all it does is reboot into defrag,
instead of explorer.exe, and then after defragging is done, it reboots
again and
restores explorer.exe.

You can do this manually and with out having to reboot (a little trick I
came up with) to start defrag as the only process running. Here's how:

1. Open system.ini or just use msconfig.exe to change the shell=explorer.exe
line to shell=defrag.exe The line is under the [boot] section.

2.Press Ctrl+Alt+Del, highlight Explorer and click End Task

3. Click NO when the Shut down screen comes up.

4. Now click End Task again

And that will do it as a subsitute to rebooting - defrag.exe will now
come up - the same way Power Defrag brings it on after a reboot(no more
explorer)

Then defrag your disk and reboot into DOS and use the instructions I
gave at the top
to restore the shell= line back to shell=explorer.exe.

 

[Lee]

On Feb 9, 7:12 pm, Peter Keller <petekel...@comcast.net> wrote:
> Pepperoni wrote:
> > My disk defragmetor keeps running in a loop and I have tried everything i can
> > and nothing seems to be working. So, if you have any help to offer please
> > tell me.
>
> Here is an old Vic Ferri trick that I saved. Make sure you know how to
> edit system.ini when you reboot. If you copy system.ini to your root drive,
> and put a line in your autoexec.bat file  to copy it back it will
> automate the
> process.(copy C:\system.ini C:\windows.) Comment out the line after you
> reboot.
>
>  >Power Defrag is very popular but all it does is reboot into defrag,
> instead of explorer.exe, and then after defragging is done, it reboots
> again and
> restores explorer.exe.
>
> You can do this manually and with out having to reboot (a little trick I
> came up with) to start defrag as the only process running. Here's how:
>
> 1. Open system.ini or just use msconfig.exe to change the shell=explorer..exe
> line to shell=defrag.exe The line is under the [boot] section.
>
> 2.Press Ctrl+Alt+Del, highlight Explorer and click End Task
>
> 3. Click NO when the Shut down screen comes up.
>
> 4. Now click End Task again
>
> And that will do it as a subsitute to rebooting - defrag.exe will now
> come up - the same way Power Defrag brings it on after a reboot(no more
> explorer)
>
> Then defrag your disk and reboot into DOS and use the instructions I
> gave at the top
> to restore the shell= line back to shell=explorer.exe.

Peter, this a better trick in that only one reboot is need and it
forces defrag to run before the system tray has loaded so no normal
overhead gets in the way. Give it a try.

REGEDIT4

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\RunOnce]
"Scandisk"="Scandskw /a /n"
"Defrag"="Defrag /All /Detailed /Noprompt"

Make the above into a .reg file and merge it - then reboot. Scandisk
will run first and then Defrag, all drives get both treatments and
then Windows finishes loading and nothing further needs to be done.
The entry above merged into the registry is automatically erased after
the processes pointed to have run - once and thus the name.

more info on .reg files if needed,
http://www.winguides.com/registry/

Pepperoni - the defrag from Windows ME runs several times faster than
98's version and it runs just fine on both 98 and 95. It is on the
web if you will just look for it.

 

[Lord Turkey Cough]

"Pepperoni" <Pepperoni@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:CE574FD5-CC58-4D0C-99B0-EECFFA1C7BC0@microsoft.com...
> My disk defragmetor keeps running in a loop and I have tried everything i
> can
> and nothing seems to be working. So, if you have any help to offer please
> tell me.

Defragging is a waste of time.

 

[Peter Keller]

Lord Turkey Cough wrote:
> "Pepperoni" <Pepperoni@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:CE574FD5-CC58-4D0C-99B0-EECFFA1C7BC0@microsoft.com...
>> My disk defragmetor keeps running in a loop and I have tried everything i
>> can
>> and nothing seems to be working. So, if you have any help to offer please
>> tell me.
>
> Defragging is a waste of time.
>
>
You've got a point My Lord. The only time I defrag is before creating
an image of my root partition. Clean out the junk and make everything
'contiguous'.

 

[Peter Keller]

Lee wrote:
> On Feb 9, 7:12 pm, Peter Keller <petekel...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> Pepperoni wrote:
>>> My disk defragmetor keeps running in a loop and I have tried everything i can
>>> and nothing seems to be working. So, if you have any help to offer please
>>> tell me.
>> Here is an old Vic Ferri trick that I saved. Make sure you know how to
>> edit system.ini when you reboot. If you copy system.ini to your root drive,
>> and put a line in your autoexec.bat file to copy it back it will
>> automate the
>> process.(copy C:\system.ini C:\windows.) Comment out the line after you
>> reboot.
>>
>> >Power Defrag is very popular but all it does is reboot into defrag,
>> instead of explorer.exe, and then after defragging is done, it reboots
>> again and
>> restores explorer.exe.
>>
>> You can do this manually and with out having to reboot (a little trick I
>> came up with) to start defrag as the only process running. Here's how:
>>
>> 1. Open system.ini or just use msconfig.exe to change the shell=explorer.exe
>> line to shell=defrag.exe The line is under the [boot] section.
>>
>> 2.Press Ctrl+Alt+Del, highlight Explorer and click End Task
>>
>> 3. Click NO when the Shut down screen comes up.
>>
>> 4. Now click End Task again
>>
>> And that will do it as a subsitute to rebooting - defrag.exe will now
>> come up - the same way Power Defrag brings it on after a reboot(no more
>> explorer)
>>
>> Then defrag your disk and reboot into DOS and use the instructions I
>> gave at the top
>> to restore the shell= line back to shell=explorer.exe.
>
> Peter, this a better trick in that only one reboot is need and it
> forces defrag to run before the system tray has loaded so no normal
> overhead gets in the way. Give it a try.
>
> REGEDIT4
>
> [HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\RunOnce]
> "Scandisk"="Scandskw /a /n"
> "Defrag"="Defrag /All /Detailed /Noprompt"
>
> Make the above into a .reg file and merge it - then reboot. Scandisk
> will run first and then Defrag, all drives get both treatments and
> then Windows finishes loading and nothing further needs to be done.
> The entry above merged into the registry is automatically erased after
> the processes pointed to have run - once and thus the name.
>

Actually I've added a few wrinkles to Vic Ferri's trick that automates
the entire process.
I'll give your method a try and compare. Thanks.

> more info on .reg files if needed,
> http://www.winguides.com/registry/
>
> Pepperoni - the defrag from Windows ME runs several times faster than
> 98's version and it runs just fine on both 98 and 95. It is on the
> web if you will just look for it.

 

[Ron Martell]

"Lord Turkey Cough" <spamdump@invalid.com> wrote:

>
>"Pepperoni" <Pepperoni@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>news:CE574FD5-CC58-4D0C-99B0-EECFFA1C7BC0@microsoft.com...
>> My disk defragmetor keeps running in a loop and I have tried everything i
>> can
>> and nothing seems to be working. So, if you have any help to offer please
>> tell me.
>
>Defragging is a waste of time.
>


Balderdash.

Fragmented files will be slower to load, and if they are badly
fragmented the slowdown can be crippling. Not too long ago I
encountered a system where their master database (inventory - file
size approximately 100 megabytes) was in over 10 thousand fragments
and the users were complaining about slow performance. One simple
defrag (took several hours) and the speedup was tremendous. They
now have a scheduled task to defrag the file weekly.

Ron Martell Duncan B.C. Canada
--
Microsoft MVP (1997 - 2008)
On-Line Help Computer Service
http://onlinehelp.bc.ca

"Anyone who thinks that they are too small to make a difference
has never been in bed with a mosquito."

 

[none]

After that response, I know why you are called turkey!
Ron IS correct!
___
"Lord Turkey Cough" <spamdump@invalid.com> wrote in message
news:rYZrj.9104$zg.8159@newsfe5-win.ntli.net...
>
> "Pepperoni" <Pepperoni@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:CE574FD5-CC58-4D0C-99B0-EECFFA1C7BC0@microsoft.com...
> > My disk defragmetor keeps running in a loop and I have tried
everything i
> > can
> > and nothing seems to be working. So, if you have any help to offer
please
> > tell me.
>
> Defragging is a waste of time.
>
>

 

[Lord Turkey Cough]

The correct form of address is "Sir".

"none" <nospam@bogusaddress.com> wrote in message
news:eI9jshabIHA.4880@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> After that response, I know why you are called turkey!
> Ron IS correct!
> ___
> "Lord Turkey Cough" <spamdump@invalid.com> wrote in message
> news:rYZrj.9104$zg.8159@newsfe5-win.ntli.net...
>>
>> "Pepperoni" <Pepperoni@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:CE574FD5-CC58-4D0C-99B0-EECFFA1C7BC0@microsoft.com...
>> > My disk defragmetor keeps running in a loop and I have tried
> everything i
>> > can
>> > and nothing seems to be working. So, if you have any help to offer
> please
>> > tell me.
>>
>> Defragging is a waste of time.
>>
>>
>
>

 

[Lord Turkey Cough]

"Ron Martell" <ron.martell@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:5bi1r3h832q6d313r2bb2i9igdfhqfvnh8@4ax.com...
> "Lord Turkey Cough" <spamdump@invalid.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Pepperoni" <Pepperoni@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>>news:CE574FD5-CC58-4D0C-99B0-EECFFA1C7BC0@microsoft.com...
>>> My disk defragmetor keeps running in a loop and I have tried everything
>>> i
>>> can
>>> and nothing seems to be working. So, if you have any help to offer
>>> please
>>> tell me.
>>
>>Defragging is a waste of time.
>>
>
>
> Balderdash.
>
> Fragmented files will be slower to load, and if they are badly
> fragmented the slowdown can be crippling. Not too long ago I
> encountered a system where their master database (inventory - file
> size approximately 100 megabytes) was in over 10 thousand fragments
> and the users were complaining about slow performance. One simple
> defrag (took several hours) and the speedup was tremendous. They
> now have a scheduled task to defrag the file weekly.

I don't believe that for a minute.
Defragging actually slows a computer down.
Obviusly a system lacking in drive space and memory is going to be
slow, but you need to upgrade not defrag.
Another benefit of regular defragging is hard drive failure, how lovely,
lost your entire database , yum yum.



>
> Ron Martell Duncan B.C. Canada
> --
> Microsoft MVP (1997 - 2008)
> On-Line Help Computer Service
> http://onlinehelp.bc.ca
>
> "Anyone who thinks that they are too small to make a difference
> has never been in bed with a mosquito."

 

[Gary S. Terhune]

"Lord Turkey Cough" <spamdump@invalid.com> wrote in message
news:2Ivsj.7701$OU5.240@newsfe6-gui.ntli.net...
>
> "Ron Martell" <ron.martell@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:5bi1r3h832q6d313r2bb2i9igdfhqfvnh8@4ax.com...
>> "Lord Turkey Cough" <spamdump@invalid.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"Pepperoni" <Pepperoni@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>>>news:CE574FD5-CC58-4D0C-99B0-EECFFA1C7BC0@microsoft.com...
>>>> My disk defragmetor keeps running in a loop and I have tried everything
>>>> i
>>>> can
>>>> and nothing seems to be working. So, if you have any help to offer
>>>> please
>>>> tell me.
>>>
>>>Defragging is a waste of time.
>>>
>>
>>
>> Balderdash.
>>
>> Fragmented files will be slower to load, and if they are badly
>> fragmented the slowdown can be crippling. Not too long ago I
>> encountered a system where their master database (inventory - file
>> size approximately 100 megabytes) was in over 10 thousand fragments
>> and the users were complaining about slow performance. One simple
>> defrag (took several hours) and the speedup was tremendous. They
>> now have a scheduled task to defrag the file weekly.
>
> I don't believe that for a minute.
> Defragging actually slows a computer down.

Balderdash.

> Obviusly a system lacking in drive space and memory is going to be
> slow, but you need to upgrade not defrag.

You're talking about an entirely different subject, there.

> Another benefit of regular defragging is hard drive failure, how lovely,
> lost your entire database , yum yum.

Got any references there? Actual tests?

--
Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User
www.grystmill.com

 

[Lord Turkey Cough]

"Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
news:eQ0ngsobIHA.4752@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>
> "Lord Turkey Cough" <spamdump@invalid.com> wrote in message
> news:2Ivsj.7701$OU5.240@newsfe6-gui.ntli.net...
>>
>> "Ron Martell" <ron.martell@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:5bi1r3h832q6d313r2bb2i9igdfhqfvnh8@4ax.com...
>>> "Lord Turkey Cough" <spamdump@invalid.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>"Pepperoni" <Pepperoni@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>>>>news:CE574FD5-CC58-4D0C-99B0-EECFFA1C7BC0@microsoft.com...
>>>>> My disk defragmetor keeps running in a loop and I have tried
>>>>> everything i
>>>>> can
>>>>> and nothing seems to be working. So, if you have any help to offer
>>>>> please
>>>>> tell me.
>>>>
>>>>Defragging is a waste of time.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Balderdash.
>>>
>>> Fragmented files will be slower to load, and if they are badly
>>> fragmented the slowdown can be crippling. Not too long ago I
>>> encountered a system where their master database (inventory - file
>>> size approximately 100 megabytes) was in over 10 thousand fragments
>>> and the users were complaining about slow performance. One simple
>>> defrag (took several hours) and the speedup was tremendous. They
>>> now have a scheduled task to defrag the file weekly.
>>
>> I don't believe that for a minute.
>> Defragging actually slows a computer down.
>
> Balderdash.
>
>> Obviusly a system lacking in drive space and memory is going to be
>> slow, but you need to upgrade not defrag.
>
> You're talking about an entirely different subject, there.
>
>> Another benefit of regular defragging is hard drive failure, how lovely,
>> lost your entire database , yum yum.
>
> Got any references there? Actual tests?

Wears out your hard drive.
I mean that is pretty self evident isn't it?
It's a bit lilke driving 5,000 miles in your car every week and expecting it
to last 5 years - it's not going to happen.These are mechanical devices
and hence wear out. I my self have never had a drive failure as I treat mine
with respect. Several hours of hard thrashing takes it toll. The bearing
don't
get time to cool down and fail.

>
> --
> Gary S. Terhune
> MS-MVP Shell/User
> www.grystmill.com
>
>

 

[Bill in Co.]

Lord Turkey Cough wrote:
> "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
> news:eQ0ngsobIHA.4752@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>>
>> "Lord Turkey Cough" <spamdump@invalid.com> wrote in message
>> news:2Ivsj.7701$OU5.240@newsfe6-gui.ntli.net...
>>>
>>> "Ron Martell" <ron.martell@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:5bi1r3h832q6d313r2bb2i9igdfhqfvnh8@4ax.com...
>>>> "Lord Turkey Cough" <spamdump@invalid.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "Pepperoni" <Pepperoni@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:CE574FD5-CC58-4D0C-99B0-EECFFA1C7BC0@microsoft.com...
>>>>>> My disk defragmetor keeps running in a loop and I have tried
>>>>>> everything i can
>>>>>> and nothing seems to be working. So, if you have any help to offer
>>>>>> please tell me.
>>>>>
>>>>> Defragging is a waste of time.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Balderdash.
>>>>
>>>> Fragmented files will be slower to load, and if they are badly
>>>> fragmented the slowdown can be crippling. Not too long ago I
>>>> encountered a system where their master database (inventory - file
>>>> size approximately 100 megabytes) was in over 10 thousand fragments
>>>> and the users were complaining about slow performance. One simple
>>>> defrag (took several hours) and the speedup was tremendous. They
>>>> now have a scheduled task to defrag the file weekly.
>>>
>>> I don't believe that for a minute.
>>> Defragging actually slows a computer down.
>>
>> Balderdash.
>>
>>> Obviusly a system lacking in drive space and memory is going to be
>>> slow, but you need to upgrade not defrag.
>>
>> You're talking about an entirely different subject, there.
>>
>>> Another benefit of regular defragging is hard drive failure, how lovely,
>>> lost your entire database , yum yum.
>>
>> Got any references there? Actual tests?
>
> Wears out your hard drive.
> I mean that is pretty self evident isn't it?

Not really.

> It's a bit like driving 5,000 miles in your car every week and expecting
> it
> to last 5 years - it's not going to happen.These are mechanical devices
> and hence wear out. I my self have never had a drive failure as I treat
> mine
> with respect. Several hours of hard thrashing takes it toll. The bearing
> don't get time to cool down and fail.
>
>>
>> --
>> Gary S. Terhune
>> MS-MVP Shell/User
>> www.grystmill.com

 

[Lord Turkey Cough]

"Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:Oo%23B3fpbIHA.4196@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> Lord Turkey Cough wrote:
>> "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
>> news:eQ0ngsobIHA.4752@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>>>
>>> "Lord Turkey Cough" <spamdump@invalid.com> wrote in message
>>> news:2Ivsj.7701$OU5.240@newsfe6-gui.ntli.net...
>>>>
>>>> "Ron Martell" <ron.martell@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:5bi1r3h832q6d313r2bb2i9igdfhqfvnh8@4ax.com...
>>>>> "Lord Turkey Cough" <spamdump@invalid.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Pepperoni" <Pepperoni@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:CE574FD5-CC58-4D0C-99B0-EECFFA1C7BC0@microsoft.com...
>>>>>>> My disk defragmetor keeps running in a loop and I have tried
>>>>>>> everything i can
>>>>>>> and nothing seems to be working. So, if you have any help to offer
>>>>>>> please tell me.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Defragging is a waste of time.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Balderdash.
>>>>>
>>>>> Fragmented files will be slower to load, and if they are badly
>>>>> fragmented the slowdown can be crippling. Not too long ago I
>>>>> encountered a system where their master database (inventory - file
>>>>> size approximately 100 megabytes) was in over 10 thousand fragments
>>>>> and the users were complaining about slow performance. One simple
>>>>> defrag (took several hours) and the speedup was tremendous. They
>>>>> now have a scheduled task to defrag the file weekly.
>>>>
>>>> I don't believe that for a minute.
>>>> Defragging actually slows a computer down.
>>>
>>> Balderdash.
>>>
>>>> Obviusly a system lacking in drive space and memory is going to be
>>>> slow, but you need to upgrade not defrag.
>>>
>>> You're talking about an entirely different subject, there.
>>>
>>>> Another benefit of regular defragging is hard drive failure, how
>>>> lovely,
>>>> lost your entire database , yum yum.
>>>
>>> Got any references there? Actual tests?
>>
>> Wears out your hard drive.
>> I mean that is pretty self evident isn't it?
>
> Not really.

Well maybe not in cloud-cuckoo land but in the real world
the laws of physics kick in, unfortunately,


>
>> It's a bit like driving 5,000 miles in your car every week and expecting
>> it
>> to last 5 years - it's not going to happen.These are mechanical devices
>> and hence wear out. I my self have never had a drive failure as I treat
>> mine
>> with respect. Several hours of hard thrashing takes it toll. The bearing
>> don't get time to cool down and fail.
>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Gary S. Terhune
>>> MS-MVP Shell/User
>>> www.grystmill.com
>
>

 

[Gary S. Terhune]

I see. It's obviously so, it must be so, therefore it is so.

I asked you for real data and you give me pure speculation. I have no wish
to engage in speculation, though for your sake I hope an expert comes along
and gives you a good discussion.

--
Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User
www.grystmill.com

"Lord Turkey Cough" <spamdump@invalid.com> wrote in message
news:9UKsj.46$Ef1.42@newsfe6-win.ntli.net...
>
> "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
> news:eQ0ngsobIHA.4752@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>>
>> "Lord Turkey Cough" <spamdump@invalid.com> wrote in message
>> news:2Ivsj.7701$OU5.240@newsfe6-gui.ntli.net...
>>>
>>> "Ron Martell" <ron.martell@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:5bi1r3h832q6d313r2bb2i9igdfhqfvnh8@4ax.com...
>>>> "Lord Turkey Cough" <spamdump@invalid.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>"Pepperoni" <Pepperoni@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>>>>>news:CE574FD5-CC58-4D0C-99B0-EECFFA1C7BC0@microsoft.com...
>>>>>> My disk defragmetor keeps running in a loop and I have tried
>>>>>> everything i
>>>>>> can
>>>>>> and nothing seems to be working. So, if you have any help to offer
>>>>>> please
>>>>>> tell me.
>>>>>
>>>>>Defragging is a waste of time.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Balderdash.
>>>>
>>>> Fragmented files will be slower to load, and if they are badly
>>>> fragmented the slowdown can be crippling. Not too long ago I
>>>> encountered a system where their master database (inventory - file
>>>> size approximately 100 megabytes) was in over 10 thousand fragments
>>>> and the users were complaining about slow performance. One simple
>>>> defrag (took several hours) and the speedup was tremendous. They
>>>> now have a scheduled task to defrag the file weekly.
>>>
>>> I don't believe that for a minute.
>>> Defragging actually slows a computer down.
>>
>> Balderdash.
>>
>>> Obviusly a system lacking in drive space and memory is going to be
>>> slow, but you need to upgrade not defrag.
>>
>> You're talking about an entirely different subject, there.
>>
>>> Another benefit of regular defragging is hard drive failure, how lovely,
>>> lost your entire database , yum yum.
>>
>> Got any references there? Actual tests?
>
> Wears out your hard drive.
> I mean that is pretty self evident isn't it?
> It's a bit lilke driving 5,000 miles in your car every week and expecting
> it
> to last 5 years - it's not going to happen.These are mechanical devices
> and hence wear out. I my self have never had a drive failure as I treat
> mine
> with respect. Several hours of hard thrashing takes it toll. The bearing
> don't
> get time to cool down and fail.
>
>>
>> --
>> Gary S. Terhune
>> MS-MVP Shell/User
>> www.grystmill.com
>>
>>
>
>

 

[Lord Turkey Cough]

"Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
news:O7S8DwqbIHA.4652@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>I see. It's obviously so, it must be so, therefore it is so.
>
> I asked you for real data and you give me pure speculation. I have no wish
> to engage in speculation, though for your sake I hope an expert comes
> along and gives you a good discussion.
>

I am 'expert' enough thank you.

OK real data for you.

1. I have defragged before and I took the time to make a
a note of the time taken for certain operations, boot up
etc.... Result no noticable difference, infact it even took longer
to boot up, there was no performance benefit whatsoever.
*Infact* if anything my machine was slower.

So there is one piece of real data.

2. Goto step 1.

Quite remarkable, you won't find any facts or figure for the performance
increase from a defrag from the sellers of defrag software.
I did not one produce had a * after performance increase, eg
performance increase*

*performance increase may be unpredictable.

Which is a nice way of covering it from being sued when it makes no
difference
or infact gets worse, I assume the 'unpredictability range' includes
negative increases.

http://www.smartcomputing.com/editorial/article.asp?article=articles/2007/s1807/19s07/19s07.asp
"However, a recent study by Diskeeper Corporation (www.diskeeper.com) found
that a brand-new computer with a fresh installation of WinXP can boot about
27% faster after running a basic disk defragmentation."

Hmmm...an 'independant' study by a company selling defrag software!!

And what an interesting study it is, because a brand new computer will of
course
be already defragged in the first place!!

Anyway defragging is a waste of time, I know that from experience as I have
done
it a few times myself on a different machine, performance is either worse or
it makes
no difference. And it's a big let down when you find you wasted all that
time for no effect,
it will seem slower even if it is the same because the performance increase
you expected
won't be there.
Of course you computer will tend to get slower over time but that is
generally because
you have more stuff installed on it, and the only way to cure that is to
uninstall it.

So....it ain't broke so I ain't fixing it :O)





> --
> Gary S. Terhune
> MS-MVP Shell/User
> www.grystmill.com
>
> "Lord Turkey Cough" <spamdump@invalid.com> wrote in message
> news:9UKsj.46$Ef1.42@newsfe6-win.ntli.net...
>>
>> "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
>> news:eQ0ngsobIHA.4752@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>>>
>>> "Lord Turkey Cough" <spamdump@invalid.com> wrote in message
>>> news:2Ivsj.7701$OU5.240@newsfe6-gui.ntli.net...
>>>>
>>>> "Ron Martell" <ron.martell@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:5bi1r3h832q6d313r2bb2i9igdfhqfvnh8@4ax.com...
>>>>> "Lord Turkey Cough" <spamdump@invalid.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>"Pepperoni" <Pepperoni@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>news:CE574FD5-CC58-4D0C-99B0-EECFFA1C7BC0@microsoft.com...
>>>>>>> My disk defragmetor keeps running in a loop and I have tried
>>>>>>> everything i
>>>>>>> can
>>>>>>> and nothing seems to be working. So, if you have any help to offer
>>>>>>> please
>>>>>>> tell me.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Defragging is a waste of time.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Balderdash.
>>>>>
>>>>> Fragmented files will be slower to load, and if they are badly
>>>>> fragmented the slowdown can be crippling. Not too long ago I
>>>>> encountered a system where their master database (inventory - file
>>>>> size approximately 100 megabytes) was in over 10 thousand fragments
>>>>> and the users were complaining about slow performance. One simple
>>>>> defrag (took several hours) and the speedup was tremendous. They
>>>>> now have a scheduled task to defrag the file weekly.
>>>>
>>>> I don't believe that for a minute.
>>>> Defragging actually slows a computer down.
>>>
>>> Balderdash.
>>>
>>>> Obviusly a system lacking in drive space and memory is going to be
>>>> slow, but you need to upgrade not defrag.
>>>
>>> You're talking about an entirely different subject, there.
>>>
>>>> Another benefit of regular defragging is hard drive failure, how
>>>> lovely,
>>>> lost your entire database , yum yum.
>>>
>>> Got any references there? Actual tests?
>>
>> Wears out your hard drive.
>> I mean that is pretty self evident isn't it?
>> It's a bit lilke driving 5,000 miles in your car every week and expecting
>> it
>> to last 5 years - it's not going to happen.These are mechanical devices
>> and hence wear out. I my self have never had a drive failure as I treat
>> mine
>> with respect. Several hours of hard thrashing takes it toll. The bearing
>> don't
>> get time to cool down and fail.
>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Gary S. Terhune
>>> MS-MVP Shell/User
>>> www.grystmill.com
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>

 

[glee]

How effective defragmentation will be for a home user depends in part on how full
the hard drive is, and what type of file creation and usage occurs on a particular
system. Programs that create or modify files and databases intensively will create
fragmentation more quickly, and those systems will benefit most from
defragmentation. Heavy use of programs such as Outlook Express (or any other
newsreader or mail client) is but one example.

For those readers here who want to understand the effects of fragmentation, these
links may prove educational:

The Adverse Effects of File Fragmentation on Video Editing
http://www.raxco.co.uk/file.asp?FileID=509

Identifying Common Reliability/Stability Problems Caused by File Fragmentation
http://files.diskeeper.com/pdf/Stability_WhitePaper.pdf

The Effects of Age and Fragmentation on File System Performance
http://www.eecs.harvard.edu/~keith/research/tr94.html

There are plenty of other studies that have been done both by makers of
defragmentation products and by independent researchers, over the past decade or
two, if anyone cares to search them out.

The "expert" analysis of Turkey Cough is in fact not an analysis at all, but rather
anecdotal reporting with no scientifically controlled data for comparison ("my
computer didn't FEEL like it was faster after defragmenting"....very scientific).

The one partially true statement made by Turkey Cough is that defragmentation can
shorten hard drive life.....but ONLY if it is done excessively, and by that I mean
on a daily basis. Also, defragmentation should not be done on a drive that is not
healthy.....IOW one that does not pass at least the rudimentary checks done by
standard scandisk, or that does not pass a diagnostic by the hard drive maker's disk
diagnostic utility, or that fails a S.M.A.R.T. test.
--
Glen Ventura, MS MVP Windows, A+
http://dts-l.net/
http://dts-l.net/goodpost.htm


"Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
news:O7S8DwqbIHA.4652@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>I see. It's obviously so, it must be so, therefore it is so.
>
> I asked you for real data and you give me pure speculation. I have no wish to
> engage in speculation, though for your sake I hope an expert comes along and gives
> you a good discussion.
>
> --
> Gary S. Terhune
> MS-MVP Shell/User
> www.grystmill.com
>
> "Lord Turkey Cough" <spamdump@invalid.com> wrote in message
> news:9UKsj.46$Ef1.42@newsfe6-win.ntli.net...
>>
>> "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
>> news:eQ0ngsobIHA.4752@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>>>
>>> "Lord Turkey Cough" <spamdump@invalid.com> wrote in message
>>> news:2Ivsj.7701$OU5.240@newsfe6-gui.ntli.net...
>>>>
>>>> "Ron Martell" <ron.martell@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:5bi1r3h832q6d313r2bb2i9igdfhqfvnh8@4ax.com...
>>>>> "Lord Turkey Cough" <spamdump@invalid.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>"Pepperoni" <Pepperoni@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>news:CE574FD5-CC58-4D0C-99B0-EECFFA1C7BC0@microsoft.com...
>>>>>>> My disk defragmetor keeps running in a loop and I have tried everything i
>>>>>>> can
>>>>>>> and nothing seems to be working. So, if you have any help to offer please
>>>>>>> tell me.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Defragging is a waste of time.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Balderdash.
>>>>>
>>>>> Fragmented files will be slower to load, and if they are badly
>>>>> fragmented the slowdown can be crippling. Not too long ago I
>>>>> encountered a system where their master database (inventory - file
>>>>> size approximately 100 megabytes) was in over 10 thousand fragments
>>>>> and the users were complaining about slow performance. One simple
>>>>> defrag (took several hours) and the speedup was tremendous. They
>>>>> now have a scheduled task to defrag the file weekly.
>>>>
>>>> I don't believe that for a minute.
>>>> Defragging actually slows a computer down.
>>>
>>> Balderdash.
>>>
>>>> Obviusly a system lacking in drive space and memory is going to be
>>>> slow, but you need to upgrade not defrag.
>>>
>>> You're talking about an entirely different subject, there.
>>>
>>>> Another benefit of regular defragging is hard drive failure, how lovely,
>>>> lost your entire database , yum yum.
>>>
>>> Got any references there? Actual tests?
>>
>> Wears out your hard drive.
>> I mean that is pretty self evident isn't it?
>> It's a bit lilke driving 5,000 miles in your car every week and expecting it
>> to last 5 years - it's not going to happen.These are mechanical devices
>> and hence wear out. I my self have never had a drive failure as I treat mine
>> with respect. Several hours of hard thrashing takes it toll. The bearing don't
>> get time to cool down and fail.
>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Gary S. Terhune
>>> MS-MVP Shell/User
>>> www.grystmill.com
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>

 

[Gary S. Terhune]

Thank you very much, kind sir.

--
Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User
www.grystmill.com

"glee" <glee29@spamindspring.com> wrote in message
news:%23bhKVXsbIHA.5768@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> How effective defragmentation will be for a home user depends in part on
> how full the hard drive is, and what type of file creation and usage
> occurs on a particular system. Programs that create or modify files and
> databases intensively will create fragmentation more quickly, and those
> systems will benefit most from defragmentation. Heavy use of programs
> such as Outlook Express (or any other newsreader or mail client) is but
> one example.
>
> For those readers here who want to understand the effects of
> fragmentation, these links may prove educational:
>
> The Adverse Effects of File Fragmentation on Video Editing
> http://www.raxco.co.uk/file.asp?FileID=509
>
> Identifying Common Reliability/Stability Problems Caused by File
> Fragmentation
> http://files.diskeeper.com/pdf/Stability_WhitePaper.pdf
>
> The Effects of Age and Fragmentation on File System Performance
> http://www.eecs.harvard.edu/~keith/research/tr94.html
>
> There are plenty of other studies that have been done both by makers of
> defragmentation products and by independent researchers, over the past
> decade or two, if anyone cares to search them out.
>
> The "expert" analysis of Turkey Cough is in fact not an analysis at all,
> but rather anecdotal reporting with no scientifically controlled data for
> comparison ("my computer didn't FEEL like it was faster after
> defragmenting"....very scientific).
>
> The one partially true statement made by Turkey Cough is that
> defragmentation can shorten hard drive life.....but ONLY if it is done
> excessively, and by that I mean on a daily basis. Also, defragmentation
> should not be done on a drive that is not healthy.....IOW one that does
> not pass at least the rudimentary checks done by standard scandisk, or
> that does not pass a diagnostic by the hard drive maker's disk diagnostic
> utility, or that fails a S.M.A.R.T. test.
> --
> Glen Ventura, MS MVP Windows, A+
> http://dts-l.net/
> http://dts-l.net/goodpost.htm
>
>
> "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
> news:O7S8DwqbIHA.4652@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>>I see. It's obviously so, it must be so, therefore it is so.
>>
>> I asked you for real data and you give me pure speculation. I have no
>> wish to engage in speculation, though for your sake I hope an expert
>> comes along and gives you a good discussion.
>>
>> --
>> Gary S. Terhune
>> MS-MVP Shell/User
>> www.grystmill.com
>>
>> "Lord Turkey Cough" <spamdump@invalid.com> wrote in message
>> news:9UKsj.46$Ef1.42@newsfe6-win.ntli.net...
>>>
>>> "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
>>> news:eQ0ngsobIHA.4752@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>>>>
>>>> "Lord Turkey Cough" <spamdump@invalid.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:2Ivsj.7701$OU5.240@newsfe6-gui.ntli.net...
>>>>>
>>>>> "Ron Martell" <ron.martell@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:5bi1r3h832q6d313r2bb2i9igdfhqfvnh8@4ax.com...
>>>>>> "Lord Turkey Cough" <spamdump@invalid.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>"Pepperoni" <Pepperoni@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>>news:CE574FD5-CC58-4D0C-99B0-EECFFA1C7BC0@microsoft.com...
>>>>>>>> My disk defragmetor keeps running in a loop and I have tried
>>>>>>>> everything i
>>>>>>>> can
>>>>>>>> and nothing seems to be working. So, if you have any help to offer
>>>>>>>> please
>>>>>>>> tell me.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Defragging is a waste of time.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Balderdash.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Fragmented files will be slower to load, and if they are badly
>>>>>> fragmented the slowdown can be crippling. Not too long ago I
>>>>>> encountered a system where their master database (inventory - file
>>>>>> size approximately 100 megabytes) was in over 10 thousand fragments
>>>>>> and the users were complaining about slow performance. One simple
>>>>>> defrag (took several hours) and the speedup was tremendous. They
>>>>>> now have a scheduled task to defrag the file weekly.
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't believe that for a minute.
>>>>> Defragging actually slows a computer down.
>>>>
>>>> Balderdash.
>>>>
>>>>> Obviusly a system lacking in drive space and memory is going to be
>>>>> slow, but you need to upgrade not defrag.
>>>>
>>>> You're talking about an entirely different subject, there.
>>>>
>>>>> Another benefit of regular defragging is hard drive failure, how
>>>>> lovely,
>>>>> lost your entire database , yum yum.
>>>>
>>>> Got any references there? Actual tests?
>>>
>>> Wears out your hard drive.
>>> I mean that is pretty self evident isn't it?
>>> It's a bit lilke driving 5,000 miles in your car every week and
>>> expecting it
>>> to last 5 years - it's not going to happen.These are mechanical devices
>>> and hence wear out. I my self have never had a drive failure as I treat
>>> mine
>>> with respect. Several hours of hard thrashing takes it toll. The
>>> bearing don't
>>> get time to cool down and fail.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Gary S. Terhune
>>>> MS-MVP Shell/User
>>>> www.grystmill.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>