Suspected PayPal Hackers Seek Deal To Stay Out Of Prison
2 Men Arrested After Teen Was Run Over For His iPad
How Windows 7 handles disk defragmenting
In a nutshell, Windows 7 features a new graphical user interface for the Windows disk defragmentor that provides uers with more control over defrag jobs and shows more detailed information about each job. You can also safely terminate the defragmenting process any time without any adverse effects.
Like Windows Vista, Windows 7 allows for scheduled defragmentation jobs. In fact, defragmentation is automatically scheduled by default, which means that most users will never have to adjust any settings in order to optimize disk performance. Well, assuming you don't turn off your computer at night, anyway. By default, the defragmenter is set to run at 1:00AM.
Windows 7 also adds the ability to defragment multiple volumes simultaneously, and the operating system will automatically disable defragmentation on any solid state disk since there's no need to defragment flash memory and continued write access to the disk could actually shorten its life.
Comments
14
Subscribe to commentsMe7Jan 26th 2009 4:24PM
Actually, to me this could be one of the sexier changes in Windows 7! Reading the linked blog, it seems that MS thinks defrag in Vista results in better performance than in XP (tell me what you think, I haven't upgraded), and they think it will be even better in W7, especially because it will be able to move NTFS metadata files. I've always been distressed at how long it takes my XP machine to defrag versus how long it takes the performance boost to wear off so I'm looking forward to reviews of W7's defrag.
nicbotJan 26th 2009 4:56PM
This may be a bit off topic, but in this day and age the one thing that concerns me really has nothing to do with the defragging process, but more the implied schedule.
In an effort to minimize end user frustration, MS has decided to have the schedule default to run at 1 am in hopes that the user will not be using their computer at this time. This made sense 10 years ago (probably more like 15) but now it seems a bit irresponsible. Assuming, implying and promoting that users should have their computers on at 1 am simply means they should let their computers run all night and most likely never turn them off or put them to sleep. This is an absurd use of power imo and MS should at least try to move to a more current train of thought.
Granted this kind of practice should start with the end user, but some people don't posses the knowledge or time to learn the in's and out's of their computers I/O system to make these adjustments. Furthermore, it would be a huge gesture on Microsoft's behalf to even suggest such power saving techniques. Talk about a top down approach to a global crisis.
KevJan 26th 2009 5:04PM
Can someone please help me out. I'm not to savy when it comes to drivers and components and stuff. But I tried to upgrade my Vista to Windows 7 and I'm getting a message that I'm not able to upgrade unless I take care of one issue; Microsoft USB Sync. Can someone tell me what the hell is this and how do I go by resolving this issue. I really want to see how Windows 7 operates like the rest of you guys but I'm stumped here.
Thanks in Advance
nicbotJan 26th 2009 5:51PM
Kinda hard to tell based on that description, but first guess is driver...
http://www.download.com/Microsoft-USB-Sync/3000-18511_4-56363.html
Make sure yours is current...or better yet, you might just want to uninstall it since you're doing a Win7 install.
FYI: "I'm not to savy when it comes to drivers and components and stuff" + Beta OS = Frustrated user ;)
Farseer (GDI)Jan 26th 2009 5:53PM
Microsoft USB Sync is related to a Pocket PC, I believe. Try it again without the PPC attached, or uninstall Microsoft USB Sync from the device manager.
I myself am not one for "updating" an OS, though. Just backup your important files and install Windows 7 clean, reformatting in the process. If you don't know much about drivers and such, though, then you really may want to wait until after the beta. If you are trying this on your only machine, you may be in for rude surprise. Betas, by definition, are not finished.
KevJan 26th 2009 7:59PM
I was actually thinking about backing up my files and do a clean reformat and install also. This will be installed on a secondary machine. As for uninstalling at driver management, I looked at that option also but it was not showing any where there. No device is plugged into my computer at this moment. I also have automatic updates enable. Wouldn't I receive an updated driver if one were available? Thank you both for the advice and timely response.
nicbotJan 26th 2009 7:59PM
Simple answer: Secondary machine, do a clean install. Sorry for not diving into your driver issue, but doing a clean install will save you time and hair pulling in the long run.
Farseer (GDI)Jan 27th 2009 7:44AM
I agree with nicbot. wipe it clean and eliminate any legacy driver conflicts.
traviseJan 27th 2009 7:44AM
I hope Diskeeper 2009 works with Win 7 and runs as nicely as it does on my Vista and XP machines. I wouldn't want to give up any of the applications that I use regularly on Vista/XP like Diskeeper, AVG, Photoshop CS3 and Opera. I have yet to d/l the 7 beta..haven't had time yet.
matyJan 27th 2009 9:13AM
Windows 7 Appears to get better by the day!
Can't install myself, not got the time and rely on too many programmes and no spare machine to test it on /sadface.
rcarmJan 31st 2009 10:16AM
you can always dual boot /happyface
MelicerteJan 27th 2009 12:32PM
Am I the only one to think that defragmentation should be something from the dead past?
I'm still waiting for Microsoft to let me know I will never have to defrag my diskdrive again. That would be a real piece of news.
laeroMay 7th 2009 10:32AM
I second that. How come I never have to defrag my Debian partition?
RichardJan 28th 2009 8:14AM
If the schedule kicks off at 1am in the morning, I'd like to know how they handle computers that are off.
Do they just not start (so in most homes, defragmentation will never run) or do they wait until the computer next turns on (so in most homes, you'll get a performance hit every time you start up your computer)?
Personally, I think they should work on avoiding the need to defragment entirely. If they cannot do that, then defragmenting when the PC is idle would make far more sense.