Darren New wrote:
> Patrick Elliott wrote:
>> Simplest answer is, it behaved that way in 3.11, when it was "even 
>> more critical", 
> 
> Huh?  Did MS make a defragmenter for Win3.11? I thought it was just the 
> dos defrag? All the third-party defrags I remember using did a fine job 
> of defragmenting absolutely everything.
> 
There is a relevant difference between DOS Defrag and a Windows one, 
back when Win3.11 "was" basically just DOS with a GUI? lol

>> and MS never bothered to steal the idea of fixing it from the few 
>> companies whose products **did** do it. ;)
> 
> Cite?  Certainly the XP defragmenter moves files around to open up free 
> spaces.  I suspect it's just files that have absolute addresses in them, 
> like the UNC and system restore points.
> 
Hmm. Nope. I had the *identical* issue with 95 and 98. You may be partly 
correct, to some extent, in that "often" the virtual memory file gets 
fragmented to hell too, and the defrag can't move those (unlike Norton 
used to in 3.11->98). So, if "that" file gets hacked up into small bits, 
the defragger will "never" fix them. Running it "over and over and over" 
under 95/98 could get it to "partly" fix some of the gaps, but at some 
point it would just flat out refuse to move anything else around, so you 
had empty spots between them, no matter how many times it ran. MS Defrag 
has "never" changed or improved this behavior in "any" release.

-- 
void main () {
   If Schrödingers_cat is alive or version > 98 {
     if version = "Vista" {
       call slow_by_half();
       call DRM_everything();
     }
     call functional_code();
   }
   else
     call crash_windows();
}

<A HREF='http://www.daz3d.com/index.php?refid=16130551'>Get 3D Models, 
3D Content, and 3D Software at DAZ3D!</A>

Post a reply to this message