Defrag tool for Win7?


Recommended Posts

Firstly I asked for your proof and you come back with some statement about the burden of proof.
Correct. This is because it is impossible to prove that 1 = 1. It is assumed so. It's impossible to prove that something is exactly the same.

I at least offered anecdotal evidence, concerning my 5-year-old XP box.

You have not even offered or tried to show proof of your statements.
Wholly false.
Only argumentative statements towards anyone that does not feel as you do on this subject.
This is all you've done this thread. Remove the wool from your eyes.
I am not here to argue with anyone.
I am. You'd be surprised how convincing honesty can be.
Agreed to disagree as far as I am

concerned. :)

Also some of your statements have been only half truths.

What a great way to agree to disagree. :rolleyes:
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I will say that these alternative defrag programs are good for one thing, and that's removing free space between files on a hard disk. I wanted to shrink my system partition the other day, but couldn't, because even though I was only using a fraction of the total storage space, the files spanned the entire hard disk. I had to download a trial of PerfectDisk to move all system files and such to one side of the hard disk so I was allowed to shrink the partition.

Firstly I asked for your proof and you come back with some statement about the burden of proof. You have not even offered or tried to show proof of your statements. Only argumentative statements towards anyone that does not feel as you do on this subject. I am not here to argue with anyone. Only to offer my knowledge and experiences. Agreed to disagree as far as I am concerned. :)

Also some of your statements have been only half truths.

Actually, he's absolutely right. The burden of proof is on you, not him. You're the one claiming that defragmenting offers significant performance improvements. You need to prove this.

His "proof" is simply the lack of evidence that there is any performance improvement. He can't exactly go out and find a "lack of evidence" to point you to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I will say that these alternative defrag programs are good for one thing, and that's removing free space between files on a hard disk. I wanted to shrink my system partition the other day, but couldn't, because even though I was only using a fraction of the total storage space, the files spanned the entire hard disk. I had to download a trial of PerfectDisk to move all system files and such to one side of the hard disk so I was allowed to shrink the partition.

Actually, he's absolutely right. The burden of proof is on you, not him. You're the one claiming that defragmenting offers significant performance improvements. You need to prove this.

His "proof" is simply the lack of evidence that there is any performance improvement. He can't exactly go out and find a "lack of evidence" to point you to.

Please show me my post were i made the statement that defragmenting offers significant performance improvements.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 steps of this thread:

* Mod will likely clean up the "half attacks" on one another

* The two posters who seem to not agree could easily talk via PM or IM about this

* The thread could get back on track regarding whether or not users have used the built-in defrag tool

Chance of happening: Yet to be determined

i agree

Don't rely on benchmarks Alone as they only tell you numbers not anything useful but i could see a point on defrag apps if the file is in say 1000 pieces but free ones would do the job fine IMHO and monkey did say a good fact about us not Running Windws 98 as in those days, fragmentation did affect a system but these days it still does, but all File Systems are prone to fragmentation even linux but the Linux File system is better at handling it thats why linux does not need a defrag app but NTFS is less prone to it then Fat32 or Fat as technology has improved,Flash drives don't need defragmenting as they could wear out faster but only if it supports it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Both posters are as bad as each other, i can't believe they're arguing about a defrag tool :|

Can a mod clean this thread, this is not why i come on Neowin, i come on for informed chat and news on tech products, not arguments, flaming and disagreements!

I've always used the built in defrag tools as they do the job adequately enough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

why does microsoft add in a defragmenter if it isnt needed?

for the same reason it's added in Linux's EXT4 :rolleyes:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ext4#Online_defragmentation

Ext4 has an online defragmenter. Even with the various techniques used to avoid it, a long lived file system does tend to become fragmented over time. Ext4 will have a tool which can defragment individual files or entire file systems.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I use Defraggler myself, but only once in a while.

I don't use it because defragging improves performance on an NTFS drive, as if it DOES, it's negligible. No, I use it because I like to keep things looking tidy. :p

Besides, torrenting REALLY makes a horrendous mess! ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All defrag utilities use the exactl same Windows API to preform their function. One utility isn't going to do a "better job" than another.

Did I say that it did a better job? Jeez.

JKDefrag probably works in Windows 7, isn?t bloated nor it installs services and it doesn?t even require an install. To me, that gives it an edge over the others.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...
His "proof" is simply the lack of evidence that there is any performance improvement. He can't exactly go out and find a "lack of evidence" to point you to.

Yes, and this is called a negative proof fallacy or relation to denying the antecedent if you want to get fancy. Moreover, the burden of proof lies with any party that makes a claim; both parties did on this thread. He didn't stop at just asking "you know this how?" he went on to make a few bare assertions about it, which obliges him to the burden of proof too.

And what effort have you done to back your claims exactly?

Maybe you're right. This site might be "full" of this type. :rolleyes:

Tu quoque.

P.S. Why does Shakey_Snake remind me of a very poor man's Lyx or Foosion? I remember when he was just a non-confrontational sycophant at HA

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, and this is called a negative proof fallacy or relation to denying the antecedent if you want to get fancy. Moreover, the burden of proof lies with any party that makes a claim; both parties did on this thread. He didn't stop at just asking "you know this how?" he went on to make a few bare assertions about it, which obliges him to the burden of proof too.

Tu quoque.

P.S. Why does Shakey_Snake remind me of a very poor man's Lyx or Foosion? I remember when he was just a non-confrontational sycophant at HA

uh..................

Thread closed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.