There is no answer!
- 7 Oct 2004
i usually leave about 30% free on the drive before i offload the stuff to our nas.
defragging files is not nearly so important to performance as defragging free space,
Already mentioned and linked to DirMS in a previous post of mine.. previous page though
Where did you read this, Matt? According to a blog post by Michael from Diskeeper Corp, the defrag engine in Vista is still based on Diskeeper code:More specifically Diskeeper Lite. However, Vista will do away with this and will be a completely new version coded by Microsoft.
http://www.diskeeperblog.com/archives/2006/02/diskeeper_and_v_1.htmlFor anyone curious about what Windows Vista will offer, the built-in defragmenter is the same basic product that we provided Microsoft in the 90's. The one difference of note is scheduling defrag will be simpler. Instead of having to use the Task Scheduler (as in XP/2003), a UI will be added to the product's main page. The current Microsoft design plan is to also implement a once a month default schedule.
lancer, with Vista right around the corner and depending whether or not you plan on upgrading right away... You may want to hold off. Vista's disk defragmenter has made great strides and will likely eliminate the need for a third part defragmenter.
besides what Matt said, the xp defrag doesn't consolidate free space which is more important then consolidating filesJust a newbie-type question, but I thought it needed to be noted as this post is not clear otherwise:
What is wrong with the WinXP (Or 9x, 2k) Defrag ?
Just a question that I thought should be answered