hello, you are believing in a myth postulated by microsoft when they made
NT, but was fast to backpedal it very fast because the whole world was
laughing...

NTFS needs defrag... you can do some serious reasearch although the web is
contaminated by misinformation still floating around from back then...



"dennis@home" <dennis@killspam.kicks-ass.net> wrote in message
news:Ob0tTa1gIHA.5280@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>
>
> "bamboozle" <bamb@oozle.com> wrote in message
> news:47d5dc5f@newsgate.x-privat.org...
>> "ray" <ray@zianet.com> wrote in message
>> news:63l3dqF26tf91U5@mid.individual.net...
>
>>> Or one could move to a modern filesystem which does not need
>>> defragmenting and obviate the entire process.
>>
>>
>> modern as in linux that is 20 years old? lol
>>
>>
>
> You have to remember that the linux guys still use FAT32 (note 1) when
> they use windows and that did need defragging.
> NTFS does not need to be defragged but like all disk based systems,
> including the latest linux ones, benefit from optimisation which is what
> the vista defragger does in the background.
>
> Note 1: most linux users use FAT32 for windows support because Linux
> can't reliably handle NTFS and they get problems using NTFS. This suits
> them anyway as it perpetuates their *erroneous* belief that you have to
> defrag windows but not linux.
>
> Anyway to the OP and anyone that wants to defrag Vista, just let Vista do
> its work in the background and forget about all the fancy displays, etc.
> it works fine. The add on utils will show fragmentation but that is
> because vista doesn't move stuff if it is not going to see an improvement
> in performance so it still leaves some files in "fragments" just like the
> linux file systems do.