Windows XP: POLL - How Often Do You Defragment and Why??
(NT) There are NO right or wrong answers here - it's a Poll
by Trance_Zac - 8/8/06 2:20 PM In reply to: POLL - How Often Do You Defragment and Why?? by Trance_Zacfairly frequently
by rgfitz - 8/8/06 2:33 PM In reply to: (NT) There are NO right or wrong answers here - it's a Poll by Trance_ZacI "mess around" with my computer and tend to remove programs I no longer use and clean related keys out of the registry.
I use Fix-It Utilities 6 and if I have done a lot of removal, I run their "All-in-one..Your one-stop solution to clean, optimize and fix your system". Defragmentation is included with virus and spyware checks and some registry cleaning.
Whether or not it improves my system is probably questionable. I would have to have two identical systems side-by-side, one cleaned up, and compare their performance and I would never do such a thing.
It just makes me feel good.
(NT) Frequently = once a month or less often
by rgfitz - 8/11/06 8:08 AM In reply to: fairly frequently by rgfitzMisplaced Emotion
by phantazy - 8/8/06 3:07 PM In reply to: (NT) There are NO right or wrong answers here - it's a Poll by Trance_ZacWhile I agree with CSRjohn, I have viewed these forums for about three years and viewed many adverse opinions.
I think it is only fair to state that everyone approaches a topic from a personally empirical point of view. There are no absolute answers as in a maths equation, unless you have a million dollar lab. I am sorry to see Csrjohn and Comicfan getting irate about intransigence, as they see it, and while I'm all in favor of constructive argument I do not see that this as an emotional issue. Mike takes his technical viewpoint about the way Hard Disks work,speed revolutions et al.and there is nothing wrong with that. Csr John takes the attitude that cluster is better for recovery and efficiency and there's nothing wrong with that either. We are talking of opinions and this makes for a lively discussion and hopefully a deeper understanding of, and reflection on, the issues for all concerned, regardless of 'Geekability'. I would like to know the further opinion of past devotees like Cetin and Bill Gaston and Aussie Pete on this issue. I think that they would not be drawn in too far for fear of pusillanimity. On a finer point it is sad to lose Comicfan who has given valuable and considered help to many (although, I hasten to add, not to myself!).
Well I've said what I think, so will now return to the issue at hand. I defrag when I have installed or uninstalled something of 40 Mb or thereabouts on an 80Gb disk. I do this because of an intuition that XP 'scatterballs' data in general terms accross the spectrum of the disk. I cannot prove any efficiency or speed gain by the result, however for future eliminations it would make sense to delete a program if it was more or less contiguous. I certainly defraggged after loading SP2. Otherwise, in the normal course of events, I don't bother, so with regard to average time it would be an instance of once every nine months.
Thank You..........
by Trance_Zac - 8/8/06 3:19 PM In reply to: Misplaced Emotion by phantazyI agree that any large downloads require a defrag, - even an XP install does.
As per your 1st paragragh - comic fan is the one who left the forum due to an un-namable member (I won't do that) who has been somewhat stubborn in seing other peoples viewpoints.
Thus the reason for this post, a really silly Poll actually - I just wanted to see what thousands of other members thought on this very basic issue.
Thanks Again!
Another reason to DEFRSG - PRIVACY
by sandkicker - 8/12/06 8:38 AM In reply to: Misplaced Emotion by phantazyIts simple
1. Defrag rearranges data so when system searches for data its in sequential order and not scattered throughout the disc.
(sorta like keeping your socks in one drawer, rather than keeping one in the top drawer and having its mate in the second drawer of you dresser).
2. Defrag does something else though, especially if your pc is used by more than one person.
Next time you defrag, analyze and view the results. Even if you have private folders, and taken ownership in XP, if there are others on the same machine with other than limited access, when
they run defrag they can view the subject of even administrator files. Not the file itself but the files path and its title. Just analyze and look for yourself.
So if you want faster access to data, DEFRAG. If you have private information, that you dont want others to know about, and they have the capability of running defrag, then by all means DEFRAG.
"not a geek, just a nosey user"
No right answers? You must be kidding
by battleborn1 - 8/11/06 8:17 PM In reply to: (NT) There are NO right or wrong answers here - it's a Poll by Trance_ZacIt's amazing the amount of misinformation out there and people seem so sure of their ignorance. If you don't care at all about degraded performance I suppose it's not important. Then again you could say the same thing about antivirus and malware programs. I always run Perfect disk 7.0 if there are more than 1000 fragments, sometimes less. Offline defragmentation I run more often, and the increased speed is noticable even then. A well defragmented disk is easier on your hard drive, even if you don't care about performance. Who are these people that claim that it is never necessary? They obviously don't know much about the subject. People that make statements like the one I refer to simply don't know what they are talking about. But again, if poor performance is what you want, then don't defragment, which is the same thing as saying why check the oil in your car... it was full when you bought it, right? Just wait till the thing hardly works at all and buy a new one, that'a a solution. I'm still trying to figure out where these people get these silly opinions from. I guess registry cleaners are unnecessary also. Buy my three year old laptop runs as fast as the day I bought it, how about yours?
Not so
by john_mcdoogle - 8/13/06 9:25 AM In reply to: No right answers? You must be kidding by battleborn1There are cases where fragmentation levels can be significant. Almost always as a side effect of a larger issue, such as the example of insufficient RAM. There are also a few applications that live and die by disk access speeds, and those will often see some benefit. However, for the average person, doing average types of things -- typing letters, browsing the web, listening to music, etc. -- there simply isn't any real benefit. All of which is dictated by the mechanics of the computer. When you look at how each subsystem interacts with the others, and view the computer as a whole, instead of only looking at a single component in isolation, it's pretty easy to see.
You can also argue back and forth all day long about whether or not the stress imposed on a drive by the act of defragmenting is greater or less than the stress caused by gradual fragmentation increase. It doesn't really matter, because Mike was right, wherever it was he said it, can't find it now. The ball bearings in the drive will give out first, which causes the motor to seize up. The motor is in perpetual operation so long as the computer is turned on, and each revolution it makes is one revolution closer to the lubricant breaking down and the friction of the bearings against their casing being greater than the motor can overcome.
Drive's fail because our manufacturing technology is imperfect, not because of fragmentation levels. Theoretically, if you cracked open your hard drive case, and applied small amounts of additional lubricant to the right places, a drive could last almost indefinitely. However, the better solution is to come up with a storage technology that doesn't rely on moving parts.
You are correct; similar analogy
by Paul3637 - 1/29/07 9:56 PM In reply to: No right answers? You must be kidding by battleborn1My last post to one of those "I don't do it" people was that failure to defragment was like not changing the oil in your car. You are correct. I have Diskeeper 2007 which does the defrag job in a matter of seconds so there simply is no issue. My computer is lightning fast - and I keep it that way by maintaining it properly.
Not regularly.
by Papa Echo - 8/8/06 2:51 PM In reply to: POLL - How Often Do You Defragment and Why?? by Trance_ZacI defragment when I feel like it - for the nice thought that my files are ''properly kept in one piece''. It is a fact that files get fragmented, and it does get longer(in computer time) for fragmented files to come up than files not so fragmented. I usually, not always, defragment after running check disk - it seems to me that ''check disk'' and ''defragment'' complements each other, and ''check disk'' is necessary.
Not often
by MarkFlax
- 8/9/06 4:21 AM
In reply to: POLL - How Often Do You Defragment and Why?? by Trance_Zac
I am not a regular defragger with XP. When I had Win 95 and then Win ME, I used to defrag once a week, or at least once a month.
But I have not found it necessary with XP. Whether it is because I find XP more stable, or whether it's because I have a larger HD and RAM and faster processor, I don't know. My HD is in RAID 0 configuration, so file access is quicker anyway, (although I run the risk of losing everything if one of the disks fails, unlike RAID 1 which duplicates all write actions on each disk, so if one disk fails, there is always a backup).
I last defragged about 6 months ago, just because it was there.
By the way John, I have deleted your last post in the list, Aug 8, 3:09pm). It was a reply and is now an orphan as the post you replied to was deleted.
Mark
Only once since I got the computer
by solitairedaxel - 8/12/06 4:21 PM In reply to: Not often by MarkFlax
I used to defrag nearly every week on my previous computer, a laptop running Windows 98.
I now have a refurbished 2004ish desktop running Windows XP Home Edition and I have only defragged once since it came back from repairs (about a year ago; I got it fourteen months ago). It didn't seem to make much difference to me, but I use a registry cleaner frequently (which I didn't on the laptop) so I'm not sure if that affects it or not. I only defragged the once because I was checking out all the utilities and it was there.
Defrag
by lablover - 8/9/06 6:21 AM In reply to: POLL - How Often Do You Defragment and Why?? by Trance_ZacAbout once a month.
Reason, aquire more contiguous free space and reduce file fragmentation.
RE: How often I defrag
by Daviddude - 8/9/06 7:25 AM In reply to: POLL - How Often Do You Defragment and Why?? by Trance_ZacI defrag once a month or sooner if I notice my computer starting to slow down. If I notice my menus start taking longer to appear on my screen or file opens or saves, or if I notice that switching between applications takes longer than usual - That is what causes me to defrag sooner. I have an Insignia D400A with a 2.8 GHZ Intel Pentium Processor 4, 512 MB RAM, Windows XP SP2.
| Forum legend: | |
 |
Locked thread |
 |
Moderator |
 |
CNET staff |
 |
Samsung staff |
 |
Norton Authorized Support team |
 |
AVG staff |
 |
Windows Outreach team |
 |
Dell staff |
 |
Intel staff |
