I HATE Vista's Defragmenter!

[TheGreatSatan]

I HATE Vista's Defragmenter! Why did they take away the percent complete feature? I ran it for 2 hours and it still hadn't finished. It could've been at 20% or 95%, who's to know. :?

[Luke122]

Why not just use a free defrag util? I have a bootable CD with tons of apps on it, including a couple of good defrag utils. Look up MiniPE2 and try for yourself. :)

[xmastree]

For 98, it's faster to defrag in safe mode. Is there an equivalent in XP?

[dgrmkrp]

There is a small utility made for vista.. Someone wrote a small script that does some stuff and you can defrag faster, it shows you progress and then asks what to do when finished.. I know I googled it after I read about the weird defrag.. MS said that they removed the % bar because you might never know how far the process is anyway, as all that % meant till now was an estimate. Also, they removed the visual part, with the lines, because they thought no one watches a hard drive being defraged.. :) that's a nice excuse..

[XcOM]

i used to watch it, its useful to see how much was left to go.

[crenn]

I watched it to.

dgrmkrp, can you try to find that utility?

I use a PerfectDisk 8 to defrag, I find it works well.

[TheGreatSatan]

My XP system uses System Mechanic which has "Jet Defrag". Apparently, it sorts your files according to which you use the most. I don't know if that truly makes a difference, but it is interesting.

[crenn]

It should make a small difference.

[Indybird]

Ooh, that reminds me, I haven't defraged this machine since I got it a year ago! Do you think thats affecting my file access and storage times? Windows Vista gives my 1 year old SATA 3.0Gb/s hard drive a 4.8.

-Indybird

[The Wicked]

I use O&O Defrgag Pro 10 on Vista. The Windows Defrag has always been weak.

[dgrmkrp]

I watched it to.

dgrmkrp, can you try to find that utility?

I use a PerfectDisk 8 to defrag, I find it works well.

I'll look for it.. no promises tho, it might have been formated along with vista.

I use o&o too, quick, nice scheduling and all kinds of nifty options for how the data should be approached. I use the "access" way of de-fragmenting data and the "space" one, depending what data is on the partition.. One thing is I never really thought about defragmenting while I had vista.. Only because I was looking at what button does what and what has changed, I noticed the weird approach MS had with their utility.. weird indeed..

[AKA_RA]

Vistas always given my decent SATA drives a pretty low score as well, something around 4.2. i had vista installed on an older 40 gig ATA100 and it only scored a few points lower. I can only guess that either means theyre giving plenty of head room for future advances, or raptors really rock for vista

[dgrmkrp]

I got a 5.something for a 300gig hdd, with about 20 gigs free on a 40gig partition, and a friend of mine had an identical hdd, but with more free space and he got 5.7, which was more than my score.. I'm not sure I should say that free space is rated, but we have the same western digital 320gig sata2, 16mb hard drive, so there shouldn't be any difference. Both were clean installs.. one was an amd based pc (mine) and the other a core 2.. Again, I'm not going to say that there is a score difference from that difference, cause that would mean the memory subsystem used by the intel board is better... :)