defragmenters

this is a general message for anyone who may be able to help on the board.
my name is bob and i just recently bought a new hard drive,the original one that came with the computer is 4.3 gb.the new one whowever is 60gb maxtor.my dilemma starts here:the defragmenter i have with the windows 98 is able to handle although slow the 4.3 gb hdd.i tried using it on the 60 gb hdd and it went to 1% to 0% and then 1% then 0% in about a 24 hour period.i finally cancelled it due to loss of mind.if anyone out there has any ideas please let me know if anyone may have invented something faster.i am trying to clean up my hard drive(s) because of slow down and crash(freezeups).i e-mailed hewlett packard and they were somewhat helpful about how to keep it a little cleaner by taking out the usual temp. files and clearing history.i would greatly appreciate any info. having to do with a faster way to rearrange and compress the hard drive(s).
thank you in advance,
bob reid
e-mail(rrreid@worldnet.att.net)

 

rrreid: I suggest you do a Search in the Windows 98 Forum for the Windows ME defragger. You'll find the posts there encouraging, as the ME defragger works wonderfully with Win98 and the posts there deal with experiences exactly like yours.

Get back to us to let us know what success you have. Good luck.

 

Or.......quicker yet.........bottom of this page.

Daizy

 

How I make Defrag work faster

I run Wn98 FE and do for sure recommend the Defrag from Windows ME. Even for 95

I never shut anything down. ( have nothing running that needs to be )

Unload the useless Taskmonitor that does nothing for me other than take up space and cause defrag to rearrange the HD according to the way I have run programs inbetween runs of defrag.

Uncheck rearrange.

Leave check for error checked. Those that say " Why run it twice " are quite correct. I never scandisk any other time anyway ( other then after a bad shutdown ) It takes no longer to let defrag run scandisk and defrag at the same step than it does to run them separate.

One thing that I have found that seems to speed up both the System and Defrag ( at least for me ) is to keep the Swap file set to a Minimum size. And if possible have it set to a min size off on another partition. And of course Windows defrag does not defrag the swap file anyway ( at least I don't think it does ) leaving it scattered to hell and back all over the drive. Then defrag has to work around it. And the larger the drive the more scatterd it is.

Has anybody that is letting windows handle the swap file run defrag with show details selected and watch for all of those little white blocks with the read X in them. If so, a good many of them are the swap file. That will show how fragmented that swap file gets.

Of course my C: drive is only 2.5gig so it don't take too long to defrag anyway. And my swap files is on another partiton. It was set at a min of 400meg and put there as one of the first things after loading Win98 on thiis machine back in April and has not been touched since. On the other machine it has not been touched in I have no idea how long.

The other partitons only get defraged after installing or removing software. ( most of them are 8gig ) The C: drive is the drive that really takes a beating as far fragmentation goes. And the more on it and the larger it is the worse it gets. Another reason for keeping the C: drive size to a smaller size.

I realize that some of this may be totaly opposite of what others and Microsoft think or say. But it works great for me.

BillyBob

PS.
I never go by what M$ says anyway. If I did I would probably be coming to you from XP and not 98.

 

Billybob:
Just as a FYI:
If I read the above correctly, you are not running Scandisk, because you are running Defrag with Check for Errors, since you believe this causes Defrag to actually run a Scandisk.
This is not true.
Defrag IS running a disk check, but nowhere near as comprehensive as a real Scandisk.

 

Ah WhitPhil! You took the words right out of my fingertips! I read and re-read BillyBob's post, and wondered the same, but didn't know how to voice it. I'd decided that I must have read wrong.

Daizy

 

WhitPhi

That could true.

But if it is then I have either been given wrong, or mis-understood some info that was passed to me.

And if so then I stand corrected.

But anyhow if the Disk check does find errors I believe it will bring up Scandisk ( or at least tell you to run it ) I have had that come up a LLOONNGGG time ago when for some unknown reason Scandisk after a bad shutdown was disabled.

I think it was the Dum-Dum that is writing this reply that did that when messing with Tweakui or the MSDOS.SYS

Maybe that is where I got the idea. And when you have not had problems with Sandisk or Defrag for a long, long time we tend to forget some things.

But either way I have not had a problem for a long time that requires running scandisk by itself. If there are errors Defrag with Check for errors checked it will find them.

But I do run Scandisk on all partitons at least once or twice a Month. So it is not like I do not run it at all. Becasue I do believe that it should be run once in awhile. It is just that I do not seem to need run it before every defrag.

As of this day If I have a problem running Defrag I go look for and shut down TCMONITOR ( I beleive that is the file name ) from Cleaner3. That is the only thing that I have run across ( so far ) that has stopped defrag from working.

The only other thing that ever messed up scandisk or defrag was McAfee software. Out side of the NProtect, ( which was really my doing ) Norton has never caused me any problems.

And if any problems were found they were always on the C: drive. Except some time ago when I had Norton Protection enabled and did not remove it correctly.

I won't even get into trouble I caused there.

Or at a time when a program itself would not behave then It might find problems on another partiton partiton.

And by still using Win98 FE I also run Norton DiskDoctor from 98 SUD and the NU CDROM. ( otherwise known as DOS )

So again, it not that I do not use the various utilities, I just use them defferently.

BillyBob