I started a defrag 11.5 hours ago...

nambit said:
fury said:
I love shitty ass slow hard drives like this IBM deathstar

Is it really called a deathstar? how cool!

I think's its the IBM DeskStar series, but people have started calling them DeathStars because the old ones could destroy your computer.
I like Western Digital best, never had a problem with them.
 
Defrag in safe mode. There isn't a swap file holding down a big chunk of the hard drive that has to be worked around. Next boot, the swap file gets placed at the end of the data. Depending on RAM size, this chunk can be quite large
I disabled the swap during the first defrag, then reenabled it and set it to do a boot-time defrag (which it lets you set an option to defrag the paging file) since reenabling it after the defrag just stuck the swap file in between all the different contiguous free space.

Apparently diskeeper doesn't stick files continuously from the beginning to the end like Windblows defrag, it just rearranges them so wherever they are, they're not fragmented.
 
I still like Speed Disk the best, it defrags the swap file, and puts it at the beginning of the disk, where the potentially fastest access is. Then it goes through and defrags the rest of the files based on use. Only thing I've found odd about it is that in Windows 2k, it never completely defrags the files, there are always a few that are still fragmented after it's done. I don't think it did that when I was using 98.
 
I don't have Speed Disk installed. I think it requires me to install Norton Systemworks in order to have access to install Speed Disk. I think I require it to be a cold day in hell in order for me to install Norton Systemworks.
 
Unless I'm mistaken, you can still install the Utilities without installing the whole works, but I wouldn't know, I have Norton Systemworks 2002, and haven't had a problem with it.
 
the most important question...

what, for the love of god, is a "defrag"??

something that happens to rabid dogs whose teeth are too long??
 
Re: the most important question...

nambit said:
what, for the love of god, is a "defrag"??

something that happens to rabid dogs whose teeth are too long??

I don't know, these bleedin' software junkies... ;) "defrag" is, of course, short for "defragment". In other words, when files on your hard disk are accessed, Windows can't be arsed to put them back in their proper, ordered place when it's finished with them, so bits of them get strewn all over the disk, slowing down your system performance cos the read/write head has to scutter about the platter piecing together all the different bits.

The defragment program tells Windows to get its arse into gear and sort that shit out. However, it don't do a good job at it, so third-party proggies such as Norton Speedisk are preferred by the masses (well, those who know what "defragging" their hard disk means...) ;)
 
Who wants to take bets on whether Nambits defrag will take longer than fury's?
 
I'll bet you - nothing - that nambits will take longer because she doesn't know what a defrag is
 
Altron said:
I'll bet you - nothing - that nambits will take longer because she doesn't know what a defrag is

erm... (see pic) :D

Dan's got two 30Gb drives, both of which are cluttered with shit, so it might just take as long as fury's ;)

Attachment(s):

dan fucked.jpg, 17.90kb

37_1039187112.jpg
 
checked my setup about 2 hours ago and turned out to be 28% fragged. Mother of god.. Ive ne'r seen it that bad. Its been working away for 2 hours now.
 
ugh...

[quote="RecklessLeper]
erm... (see pic) :D
[/quote]

Which i think shows why one should never trust ginger people - he'd have to go find the most mingingist photo of me, with the chongingist hangover...

cheers buddy!!
 
nambit said:
RecklessLeper said:
erm... (see pic) :D

Which i think shows why one should never trust ginger people - he'd have to go find the most mingingist photo of me, with the chongingist hangover...

cheers buddy!!

bwehehehe... ah, tis all in de spirit o' good fun :D
 
PuterTutor said:
OK, do you not need to defrag in Linux?

No, the ext2 and ext3 file systems are designed to have minimum fragmentation.
 
Back
Top