UltimateDefrag - is this the best defragger ever?

Bad luck positively.

When to test it's too easy. With effectual results and effectiveness. Without to need an expert'engineer team (in fact a common user can do that easily). There aren't any earnings to intricate what is unmixed.

Far better luck have the Windows'users: Microsoft gave them a Disk Defragmentation tool in their OS; it seems that MS didn't give that to have a good laugh at their OS'users behind closed doors.

BTW, Microsoft has a very good engineer in these issues (and others): Mark Russinovich. Maybe he is laughing at their software'users (who use e.g. their Contig defragmenter) behind closed doors also. No problem at all: the users can use and are helped with their excellents Sysinternals'programs.

 

Peter

did you try to move or defrag offline files with the boot defrag and after the reboot run chkdsk /F C: ?

 

Manta - sorry to be so slow. I have done you test with no problem. I use C: for windows Xp and programs and D: for data. I keep the pagefile.sys on D: and have moved it to the outer edge ( as far as UD sees it ). Unlike others I have had no problems at all with the boot defrag

Edit: To show D: with pagefile.sys moved to the edge

 

I guess the only qualifier I'd add is that there is a difference between the logical and physical geometry of modern HDD's (multiple recording zones, defect remapping, etc.) and the detailed physical geometry really is under the purview of the physical device only. I suppose the basic start/end locations should be somewhat well defined, but everything in between isn't, nor is the precise definition of "in between" (since that depends on a whole bunch of physical factors (stuff like number of platters, spare locations, etc.) that are basically hidden behind the HDD controller logic).

Blue

 

A lot is hidden behind the HDD controller logic that the software (degraggers) cannot discern. Most of what you see is simply pretty pictures on a screen of blocks of data being moved from one place to another with no resultant increase in access time.

 

There is a difference between finding a file to move for example, versus the ability to define what an outer/inner platter is on a modern HD. It is by definition impossible because the defragging software cannot interact with the HD firmware and share a definition of what an outer/inner zone is relative to the physical disk structure.

 

On the other hand, they should be able to discern operational performance metrics and use that kind of information. I don't know if that's done, but it should be possible.

As for some of the issues raised in this thread..., my experience is that they will help in improving system performance with nearly full drives that are highly fragmented. That's a rather specific situation, but one that can be realized.

Blue

 

thanks
i have not problems
xp runs great
but i found after moving the mft this in the log of chkdsk

how can i comunicate this to ud team?

 

There is a difference between should and actuality- and that is the issue.

My experience is the opposite and any gains in access times are extremely marginal- i.e., virtually imperceivable.

 

Actually, in the specific example that I noted above, the difference was quite perceivable and not trivial. Like many things related to PC's, this is very machine dependent. The fact that you don't perceive a benefit doesn't make it a generally applicable result. By the same token, my observation is not generally applicable either. That's why I explicitly labeled it a "specific situation".

Other there other situations in which this type of product could help? My casual assessment is yes. Should people use this assessment as a reason to run out and purchase something? Probably not. Should people spill as many electrons discussing the relative merits of defragging applications as they currently do? Probably not. Is this genre of application pure snake oil? No. Are the general benefits hyped? Probably. Like most things in life, context and the local circumstance matters.

Blue

 

Hi Pete,

What you describe is exactly what is happening in the stream between any OS and the BIOS, but the actual start/end of a platter ain't known by the OS nor by the BIOS, software can ask the bios to read/write data on sector XXX, the data is being fed to the harddisk controller, which knows where that sector is physicaly located, the BIOS and the OS's don't have any idea where they are physically. They basically don't know any more than the start- & endsector of any partition, and that's all they know.

 

I don't know why, but now my MFT only have less than 100MB, when was set to 500MB.

I already restored the registry keys to use 12.5% of free space, but didn't work

 

This is my routine for what it's worth,

First i clean up with Disk Cleaner & ClearProg which only uses M$'s delete. I then use RECUVA to "scan deeply" deleted files then re-delete them. Enter the picture RESTORATION that finishes the scramble job of already deleted files. Then comes Nirsoft's CleanAfterMe with a one pass wipe followed by deleting ShellBags for added privacy and maybe even clearing away that space too.

When satisfied enough i do a DiskTrix defrag followed by a boot time defrag.

Contrary to what anyone, pro or experienced subscribes to or believes in, i gain PERFORMANCE! like it or not. It makes sense the less leftover data laying on the disk platter only gets the attention of the O/S to first "look" then "decide" whether to skip over this deleted file or re-write over it's remains.

I find this routine BOOSTS my performance noticably and AFAIK since i'm not an engineer in these things, i conclude from the stepped up responses after perfoming these wipes that there is indeed both speed to gain as well as the defrag helps to move enough files (deleted or not) to clear away space for the HD to function more adequately and subsequently prolong the life of my hard drives.

EASTER

 

sorry but where didi you find disk cleaner and clearprog uses m$'s delete?

does somebody find in the xp log eventvwr.msc

 

It appears obvious to me that it deletes on the same level according to the other wiper apps i use afterwards and recovery progs and why it moves me to take other additional steps with more aggressive leftover data/platter wipers to wipe the slate better.

 

With the common use of SSD drives in the near future i guess the discussion about the usefullness of defrag will greatly diminish,the bottleneck in speed such as the mechanical read/write heads are gone.Theoretically the speed will almost elevate to the speed of light,but for now tests confirm that the realworld is not up to the theory so discussion will continue for awhile.

 

To try to fix this, I installed PerfectDisk and set it to run an Offline defrag.
After that run the Offline defrag of UD and now MFT is OK again.

I also run UD Offline on my other Partition and it creates the pagefile.sys when I don't have it define for that that Partition.

UD Offline defrag is buggy, so I advice you to not use it until new versions...

 

perfectdisk is nasty to uninstall
i know there is a bug with shadowuser or shadow protect

 

No problems here, and I don't use shadowuser or shadow protect...

 

I don't see how this works. I have just tried Recuva and no matter what I do I'm still left with the same number of references for the OS to have to "look" at until some read data is written over the old. From a security point of view or recovery this program might be of use but as a way of increasing performance I just can't see it.

 

Well, i run a deep scan, and the green are recoverable deleted filed wheres the red are overwritten and unrecoverable. I check the very top box then select "secure delete all checked", then move to RESTORATION for the final wipe over. Seems to work fine here.

EASTER

 

Well, if you really need it i can run some disk access measurement apps and screenshot the results or else just make a movie from the start of this wiping to the end result. And yes there will be a noticable speedup/response after applying my method, otherwise i wouldn't waste the time it can take to do it.

EASTER