MS OS - Microsoft Forum to Usenet Gateway

Scooter

The main reason they did this was the fact tha most people that did
serious defragging with XP did not use the Xp defrag anyway. So they
dumbed it down for the basic user.

They chose to not spend the money to compete against the third party
vendors to give something away. Which was a good business decision and
they could use their resources elsewhere.

Get Diskeeper 2008, it's awesome


--
Scooter
Posted via http://www.vistaheads.com

Steve Thackery

> Get Diskeeper 2008, it's awesome

......and it's a waste of money. The Vista defrag works just fine.
Diskeeper gives you some pretty (but meaningless) coloured blocks to watch.
You've gotta be a particularly sad kind of nerd to want to spend time
watching coloured blocks dancing around.

Vista's defrag is intended to work invisibly and unnoticeably. And it does.

The best thing you can do is forget all about defragging. Vista will take
care of it. Instead, you can spend your time actually using your computer
for something constructive.

SteveT

Robert Moir

Scooter wrote:
> The main reason they did this was the fact tha most people that did
> serious defragging with XP did not use the Xp defrag anyway. So they
> dumbed it down for the basic user.
>
> They chose to not spend the money to compete against the third party
> vendors to give something away. Which was a good business decision
> and they could use their resources elsewhere.
>
> Get Diskeeper 2008, it's awesome

If you want to watch coloured blocks move around on screen why not play
tetris and actually control the blocks while they move? Or play breakout?

Whether or not Vista's defrag "sucks" as per the title of the post is one
thing, but Microsoft are actually trying to do something different with this
in Vista to what they have done previously. In Vista, defrag is supposed to
be a background maintenance task that users shouldn't have to interact with,
so you don't get the pretty pretty colours to look at and it doesn't do
things the way people are used to.

This is one of the things where I think Microsoft have got the idea right.
Did you actually buy your computer so you could watch diskkeeper or whatever
move little blobs of colour around your screen, or did you buy your computer
to watch videos, play games, do your taxes or whatever?

Clear Windows

The idea is not right, no percentage, no progress bar, no visual feedback
whatsoever.

People making defrag programs for 20 years were not stupid by adding those.

Defrag a service is a good additional thing, but there should have been a
better gui with visual feedback also.

People who download torrents or are working with video editing and large
files will laugh at the stupid vista defragger
that gives no real control of what is going on.

I have posted this too many times.. but you vista fanboys don't get it
still.

Why degrade an interface and dumb it down? The defrag could have had a
details drop down expanding box much like
the move and copy does that shows you visual feedback with numbers.

If you don't believe that visual feedback is important, please disconnect
your monitor and use your pc without one....

thanks

"Robert Moir" <usenet+robspamtrap@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:e9$RAnPrIHA.3900@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Scooter wrote:
>> The main reason they did this was the fact tha most people that did
>> serious defragging with XP did not use the Xp defrag anyway. So they
>> dumbed it down for the basic user.
>>
>> They chose to not spend the money to compete against the third party
>> vendors to give something away. Which was a good business decision
>> and they could use their resources elsewhere.
>>
>> Get Diskeeper 2008, it's awesome
>
> If you want to watch coloured blocks move around on screen why not play
> tetris and actually control the blocks while they move? Or play breakout?
>
> Whether or not Vista's defrag "sucks" as per the title of the post is one
> thing, but Microsoft are actually trying to do something different with
> this in Vista to what they have done previously. In Vista, defrag is
> supposed to be a background maintenance task that users shouldn't have to
> interact with, so you don't get the pretty pretty colours to look at and
> it doesn't do things the way people are used to.
>
> This is one of the things where I think Microsoft have got the idea right.
> Did you actually buy your computer so you could watch diskkeeper or
> whatever move little blobs of colour around your screen, or did you buy
> your computer to watch videos, play games, do your taxes or whatever?
>

Chris Game

On Sat, 3 May 2008 08:38:59 +0100, Steve Thackery wrote:

> You've gotta be a particularly sad kind of nerd to want to spend
> time watching coloured blocks dancing around.

LOL! Hands up those who have done exactly this!

--
Chris Game

"Upgrade to XP, it's well better to be honest. 98 sucks biggo."
-- Mike Campbell

Canuck57

"Robert Moir" <usenet+robspamtrap@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:e9$RAnPrIHA.3900@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Scooter wrote:
>> The main reason they did this was the fact tha most people that did
>> serious defragging with XP did not use the Xp defrag anyway. So they
>> dumbed it down for the basic user.
>>
>> They chose to not spend the money to compete against the third party
>> vendors to give something away. Which was a good business decision
>> and they could use their resources elsewhere.
>>
>> Get Diskeeper 2008, it's awesome
>
> If you want to watch coloured blocks move around on screen why not play
> tetris and actually control the blocks while they move? Or play breakout?
>
> Whether or not Vista's defrag "sucks" as per the title of the post is one
> thing, but Microsoft are actually trying to do something different with
> this in Vista to what they have done previously. In Vista, defrag is
> supposed to be a background maintenance task that users shouldn't have to
> interact with, so you don't get the pretty pretty colours to look at and
> it doesn't do things the way people are used to.
>
> This is one of the things where I think Microsoft have got the idea right.
> Did you actually buy your computer so you could watch diskkeeper or
> whatever move little blobs of colour around your screen, or did you buy
> your computer to watch videos, play games, do your taxes or whatever?

Actually, if Microsoft ever changes file system formats again, they should
design it so defrag isn't even required. That is, don't fragment in the
first place.

Iain

Canuck57 wrote:
> "Robert Moir" <usenet+robspamtrap@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:e9$RAnPrIHA.3900@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>> Scooter wrote:
>>> The main reason they did this was the fact tha most people that did
>>> serious defragging with XP did not use the Xp defrag anyway. So they
>>> dumbed it down for the basic user.
>>>
>>> They chose to not spend the money to compete against the third party
>>> vendors to give something away. Which was a good business decision
>>> and they could use their resources elsewhere.
>>>
>>> Get Diskeeper 2008, it's awesome
>> If you want to watch coloured blocks move around on screen why not play
>> tetris and actually control the blocks while they move? Or play breakout?
>>
>> Whether or not Vista's defrag "sucks" as per the title of the post is one
>> thing, but Microsoft are actually trying to do something different with
>> this in Vista to what they have done previously. In Vista, defrag is
>> supposed to be a background maintenance task that users shouldn't have to
>> interact with, so you don't get the pretty pretty colours to look at and
>> it doesn't do things the way people are used to.
>>
>> This is one of the things where I think Microsoft have got the idea right.
>> Did you actually buy your computer so you could watch diskkeeper or
>> whatever move little blobs of colour around your screen, or did you buy
>> your computer to watch videos, play games, do your taxes or whatever?
>
> Actually, if Microsoft ever changes file system formats again, they should
> design it so defrag isn't even required. That is, don't fragment in the
> first place.
>
>
....such as UFS or VxFS on Sun Solaris and HP-UX.

Iain

Clear Windows wrote:
> The idea is not right, no percentage, no progress bar, no visual
> feedback whatsoever.
>
> People making defrag programs for 20 years were not stupid by adding those.
>
> Defrag a service is a good additional thing, but there should have been
> a better gui with visual feedback also.
>
> People who download torrents or are working with video editing and large
> files will laugh at the stupid vista defragger
> that gives no real control of what is going on.
>
> I have posted this too many times.. but you vista fanboys don't get it
> still.
>
> Why degrade an interface and dumb it down? The defrag could have had a
> details drop down expanding box much like
> the move and copy does that shows you visual feedback with numbers.
>
> If you don't believe that visual feedback is important, please
> disconnect your monitor and use your pc without one....
>
> thanks
>


Actually, it's better to devote all resources to this critical task
rather than wasting them and time to provide meaningless visual clues.
When it's done, its done.

Canuck57

"Iain" <iain@comnet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:683bthF2rgjp9U1@mid.individual.net...
> Canuck57 wrote:
>> "Robert Moir" <usenet+robspamtrap@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:e9$RAnPrIHA.3900@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>>> Scooter wrote:
>>>> The main reason they did this was the fact tha most people that did
>>>> serious defragging with XP did not use the Xp defrag anyway. So they
>>>> dumbed it down for the basic user.
>>>>
>>>> They chose to not spend the money to compete against the third party
>>>> vendors to give something away. Which was a good business decision
>>>> and they could use their resources elsewhere.
>>>>
>>>> Get Diskeeper 2008, it's awesome
>>> If you want to watch coloured blocks move around on screen why not play
>>> tetris and actually control the blocks while they move? Or play
>>> breakout?
>>>
>>> Whether or not Vista's defrag "sucks" as per the title of the post is
>>> one thing, but Microsoft are actually trying to do something different
>>> with this in Vista to what they have done previously. In Vista, defrag
>>> is supposed to be a background maintenance task that users shouldn't
>>> have to interact with, so you don't get the pretty pretty colours to
>>> look at and it doesn't do things the way people are used to.
>>>
>>> This is one of the things where I think Microsoft have got the idea
>>> right. Did you actually buy your computer so you could watch diskkeeper
>>> or whatever move little blobs of colour around your screen, or did you
>>> buy your computer to watch videos, play games, do your taxes or
>>> whatever?
>>
>> Actually, if Microsoft ever changes file system formats again, they
>> should design it so defrag isn't even required. That is, don't fragment
>> in the first place.
> ...such as UFS or VxFS on Sun Solaris and HP-UX.

Or AIX LVM, also Solaris ZFS, Linux EXT3 and a host of others, but yes you
read my mind.

The need for defrag to exist at all means the file system is crude, old
unsophisticated and rudimentary at best. Makes one wonder why Vista has to
take so long to write to the disk on large file writes.

Adam Albright

On Sat, 3 May 2008 11:49:10 +0100, Chris Game <chrisgame@example.net>
wrote:

>On Sat, 3 May 2008 08:38:59 +0100, Steve Thackery wrote:
>
>> You've gotta be a particularly sad kind of nerd to want to spend
>> time watching coloured blocks dancing around.
>
>LOL! Hands up those who have done exactly this!

That's all Frank does when he's not flapping his gums.