What's the best free disk defragger, not in Windows, for NTFS and FAT drives/partitions?
in [Storage]
|
Prev: My 128 GB flash drive is not working
Next: What's the best free disk defragger, not in Windows, for NTFSand FAT drives/partitions?
From: Jerry Peters on 16 Dec 2009 16:54 Cronos <cronos(a)sphere.invalid> wrote: > Jerry Peters wrote: > >> Smart people? You certainly wouldn't know it looking at Windows. >> >> Sorry, but appeals to authority will only get you so far. Evidence >> would be a lot better. >> >> Jerry > > Unfounded trolling will get you no where with me. > > *plonk* Smart people make poor decisions all the time, look at Bill Clinton, or Tiger Woods, or even more apropos, Windows Vista. Your very smart people at MS *really* blew it with Vista.
From: Jerry Peters on 16 Dec 2009 16:59 Cronos <cronos(a)sphere.invalid> wrote: > Bob Willard wrote: > >> I can imagine nasty combinations of workloads and platforms that would >> make defragging helpful, but they must be really rare now. >> >> In a former life (~15 years ago), doing backup from HD=>tape, it was >> obvious that defragging before starting a backup kept the tape mostly >> streaming, while skipping the defrag step led to a lot of shoe-shining. >> That system was a 486/33 with 4MB of RAM, running Win 3.1, with a >> 3600 RPM non-DMA FAT16 HD, and a QIC (definitely not quick) tape >> connected over a shared parallel port; and, the (Colorado) backup >> software was very primitive. >> >> In that era, I used to say that any mag.tape had only two speeds: >> "It streams or it sucks". >> >> Over the past dozen or so years, I've never been able to notice any >> performance gain due to defragging, which is why I always recommend >> using a defragger which is free: either none, or whatever is bundled >> with the OS. > > Just because your eyes don't visually detect the difference does not > mean there is no difference. Can you visually tell the dif between a > 2.4ghz cpu and a 2.6ghz cpu? No! And for most people's workloads would there be enough of a difference to actually make a difference? If I can't tell there's a difference it doesn't matter for any practical purposes.
From: Bilky White on 17 Dec 2009 03:56 "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa(a)gmail.com> wrote in message news:7ot2haF3r88pdU1(a)mid.individual.net... > > Why did you bring up age? > > Because you come across like a big kid that sulks and shouts when it doesn't get its own way?
From: Rod Speed on 17 Dec 2009 19:06 Cronos wrote: > Jerry Peters wrote: > >> Smart people make poor decisions all the time, look at Bill Clinton, >> or Tiger Woods, or even more apropos, Windows Vista. >> Your very smart people at MS *really* blew it with Vista. > > People who feel the need to brag that they are smarter than others are > dumb fucks with an inferiority complex. So what are fools that lie about their killfiles ?
From: Rod Speed on 17 Dec 2009 19:09
Cronos wrote: > Rod Speed wrote: >> Doesnt happen with defragging, because the absolute vast bulk of >> linear access to very large files is with media files where it takes >> EXACTLY the same time to play the file whether its fragmented or not. > Not to open or move the file though. Yes, to open a file too. And a move which just changes the directory entry too. > That's were defrag comes into play Like hell it is. > and not FPS. |