As mentioned recently, I have just upgraded my laptop to a new HP 6175b, which came pre-installed with Windows Vista. As a result I will probably be posting some recommendations, rants and feedback with regard to using Windows Vista.
Overall, things have run very smoothly, though I am still tweaking and testing the system. However, one small thing jumped out at me today which completely baffled me.
Vista sees a change being brought to the Disk Defragmenting tool1. As per usual, you can access it by double-clicking Computer, right-clicking on one of your hard drives and selecting “Properties”. In the Properties dialogue select the “Tools” tab and click on “Defragment Now”.
This brings up the Disk Defragmenter, where you can view the current schedule and modify it if you desire, or you can begin defragmenting. If you begin defragmenting you will notice that for some unknown reason Microsoft have decided not only to remove the information display on what drives you have and the ability to do an analysis only2, but once you have decided to go ahead with defragmenting, they have completely removed any display of progress!
This completely baffles me, and I am sitting here waiting to do a restart not knowing how long it will take for my defragmenting to complete. All the information they are giving me is that “This may take from a few minutes to a few hours”.
Thanks Microsoft – this is definitely one change that I think you should rectify with an update.
Update:
Andrew McLaren has given a little more background information regarding the decision to remove progress indication over on the Windows Vista community discussion group:
This change was actually on purpose. As I understand it, in Vista, Defrag was rewritten by Microsoft to remove the last of the code they’d licensed from Executive Software. In the process, it was noted that the old Defrag GUI, although visually appealing, was actually quite an inaccurate picture of what was really happening on the disk. To rework the UI to provide an accurate, real-time image of the disk would have been a major project. Even keeping the existing GUI would have carried a cost, because that code would have needed to pass a Vista security review – another major project, and for tombstoned code.
Furthermore, in Vista Defrag is configured to run silently in the background, as Scheduled Task; so a glossy UI was less important than earlier versions where Defrag only ran interactively. In Vista, all you get is the “Disk Defragmanter” dialogue box, with a “Run on a Schedule” option (selected by default) and a “Defragment Now” button to kick off a manual defrag. The idea is that most of the time, most users will never run Defrag interactively – it will be a weekly or daily background task they never notice (like the many other regularly scheduled maintence tasks in Vista).
My understanding is that Microsoft hope to add a more descriptive visual GUI in a later release, for users who wish to run Defrag interactively. They are aware the users liked the old visuals. But for the release of Vista, it was judged a reasonable trade-off, to ditch the misleading and unsecured old GUI, in favor of the minimal but adequate (and secured) UI we see today.
Thanks to Andrew for giving some additional information there – although I do think for a power-user this still does not justify there being absolutely no indication of progress or estimated time remaining. I do agree though that the old GUI didn’t really serve too much of a purpose.
- Over time you delete and add new files to your hard drives. As time goes on, related files get placed in different areas on your hard disk. Files might end up being split in multiple locations as well. This is referred to as File Fragmentation. Defragmenting analyses your hard drive, moves files around and attempts to put all the frequently accessed files near the start of the drive. This helps by decreasing hard drive access times and reducing the amount of work the hard drive has to do – theoretically increasing drive life span.
- Doing an analysis only would allow you to see how much fragmentation exists and to make a decision on whether or not it is necessary to proceed with defragmenting.
1:01 am
July 11th, 2007
Defragmentation process is automatic and it’s made on low I/O priority and when you’re not using the PC, so you don’t need to worry about it. I like Windows Vista defrag.
1:28 am
July 11th, 2007
Well, perhaps I don’t need to worry too much about it. I was just surprised that there wasn’t even a progress display when you manually start a defrag.
It seems a little strange that power users aren’t being accommodated. For example, as a gigging laptop musician, I would often give my system all the tweaks I could think of prior to a gig, including running a defrag. I’m failing to see why it was necessary to remove all progress indication.
Other than that, if it’s doing its job, I’m happy about it.
8:30 am
July 11th, 2007
Meh..I do not like the Vista defragger. I think MS is just coming up with excuses as to why they couldnt put in more options for the defragger. “Its like an insult to the user…you ain’t intelligent enough to figure out all the options, so we removed them.”
Like you said, power users should have more options, and a progress display is a must. As for the auto defrag mode in vista, it’s quite finicky, and it runs a very low priority process.
Third party defraggers seem to have no problems implementing all of the above. Infact, last week i tested out the trial version of Diskeeper Pro on my friend’s Thinkpad, and it does a fantastic job, with all the options, progress display and multiple drive options readily available in the GUI. The bare-bones vista defragger doesnt even come close.
2:31 pm
July 28th, 2007
When doing a defrag on any computer, the bits I am interested in are: (1) the extent of the ‘problem’ (i.e. the results of clicking ‘Analyze’) and (2) how far through the job it is, while it is doing it.
The ‘pretty coloured’ representation of the disk is a nice-to-have, but I don’t rely on it. The progress indicator (in percent) is extremely useful.
So why get rid of it, and why does vista have a “your disk should/should not be defragmented” binary display, when I am quite capable of making that decision myself after reading the disk analysis?
All in all, their response is rubbish. Sure, the ‘picture’ of the disk might not be accurate – so bin it! But the analysis and progress bar are simply essential, if you are a ‘power user’. So fine, remove them for ‘Home Basic’ etc., but those of us with ‘Business’ or ‘Ultimate’ might be interested …
4:01 am
August 14th, 2007
I despise the lack of a progress display of any kind. This evening, I wanted to load virtual server technology, so I for the first time used Vista’s defragmenter to optimize everything as best I could.
Thinking, of course, that I would get some kind of progress display to let me know when I should expect to take the next step.
Wrong. This is like doing things in VMS again…start it, and spend the rest of whatever holiday waiting for it to get done…
6:48 pm
August 19th, 2007
Just got my new computer with Vista Ultimate…Been putting all the updates and installing drivers etc and decided..OK..Now it is time to do my first defrag
OY…It has run more than a “few minutes” … Wondering if I have a “few hours” more to wait. I have read the above statements and can’t comment too much on the technical stuff as I am not a technical person…
But I can say this uneqivocably tho….I miss not knowing how freakin long I have to wait. Microsoft got this wrong! I pray for a fix…
Well time for lunch and then I am going out to a show…Wondering if I should tell my gf that my getting eating and then getting ready may take a few minutes or a few hours so I can let her guess.
Peace out
9:47 pm
August 19th, 2007
Ha!
Yeah, it’s quite frustrating, and somewhat baffling as to why they would drop any sort of progress display. I guess everyone should make as much noise as possible as regards bringing back a progress display.
@everyone: Head over the to Windows Vista community discussion group and drop some feedback.
Alex
3:53 am
August 30th, 2007
I so agree. The display that was there might not have been as accurate as it would have been, but at least there was some indication. If a program is provided and provided to do certain actions, it should do so in a manner that’s in keeping with prior versions.
Time might have been a problem…but, then it might not have been time to release Vista. There were several features promised with this release….several that did not make the cut. In future, I really think Microsoft needs to take the time it needs and not rush things only to have to service pack them at a later date.
2:57 pm
September 22nd, 2007
Case in point. I am installing a Rollback program. To do this properly, I must first defragment the hard drive. I have no Idea how long I will be waiting before I can install the new program. Twenty minutes? Three hours?
Some sort of indication of the progress would sure aid in my planning .
9:50 pm
October 10th, 2007
Well, I really do not like the Vista defrag., either. And I do not completely believe the explanation. There are quite a few areas of Vista Home Premium which have apparently been aimed at the thick end of the market, a kind of ‘dumbing down’ of anyone not actually a geek or company manager etc.
Please let us have the old defrag back!
5:12 am
December 15th, 2007
You do not have to be a ‘geek’ or a ‘company manager’ to want to see the defrag progress.
The previous progress displays may have not been accurate but at least it did give you some idea as to the time it might take.
I have had some problems with my install of Vista (Ulti), I have now reinstalled and its working fine.. so I figured as I have a untainted install, I will defrag and backup.
3:54 pm
December 31st, 2007
Zaffre, I agree wholeheartedly.
Definitely something they should rectify – surely it can’t be a major request to at least have a time left indication?!
I’m sticking with XP for the time being so it’s no concern anyway!
8:58 pm
February 2nd, 2008
I need the old gui back, accurate or not,or better one if poss.. it feels sick waiting for it to complete..
10:14 pm
February 2nd, 2008
I would suggest turning off the inbuilt Vista defragger and running something else, such as Defraggler from Piriform (they made the excellent CCleaner).
You can get it from File Hippo here:
http://www.filehippo.com/download_defraggler/
I’ve just downloaded it now for XP and will be testing it out tonight.
2:07 pm
April 1st, 2008
Rule #1 of user interfaces: give the user feedback.
11:08 am
April 13th, 2008
@MGB: Absolutely. The difference between using Vista’s in-built defrag system and something like Defraggler is phenomenal.
With Defraggler you can clearly see what percentage is complete, and you get a definite sensation that work is being completed. I’m still so surprised that they dropped any sort of progress display on Vista’s defrag routine.
Does anyone know whether they addressed this for Vista with Service Pack 1?
5:56 pm
August 13th, 2008
Windows = Graphical User Interface oriented Operating System
Interface = (Quote from Merriam – Webster “2 a: the place at which independent and often unrelated systems meet and act on or communicate with each other b: the means by which interaction or communication is achieved at an interface”) No interaction or exchange of information.
Summary = useless
3:11 pm
November 25th, 2008
I definitely miss a graphic display for the defragger. I use the full version of Diskeeper, set it on automatic mode. It works great even when other programs are open. Supposedly defrags with less than 15% free space, but I never let my drives choke with stuff.
5:41 pm
December 20th, 2008
I just ran into this problem myself today. Utterly ridiculous. I’m not an MS basher, but they sure make it hard to be an MS supporter.
2:26 pm
December 21st, 2008
It’s quite hard to believe that they’ve done this alright. I wonder will things be different in Windows 7. I’m actually currently testing out Ubuntu as a potential web development system. I would be unlikely to wholesale shift OS, as there are some pieces of software which I use that will keep me tied to Windows for a good while longer, but for coding purposes there doesn’t seem to be any reason for me not to move.
If I do dive into it, I’ll be keeping the blog updated with my experiences in case it’s of any interest to the general populous!
In the meantime, do check out Defraggler, which I’ve always been very happy with (not that you should need to replace an OS function like that, but anyway…).
3:33 am
January 16th, 2009
This is just silly,
I am totally fed up with Vista treating me like a moron who doesn’t need to know anything and worse have any real control over my software, UAC for example.
I want to get an idea of when the programmes I run will finish, maybe I have things to do that use all my computers resources, rendering, media conversions, even gaming, why should I be left in the dark as to when and where my system maintenance will finish.
FFS Microsoft, start treating your customers with some respect and then maybe we will start to respect you.
It is such a shame that Microsoft the monopoly it has, If it didn’t then maybe they would act with some consideration for us the consumers.
3:55 am
January 16th, 2009
Thanks Alex, Just downloaded Defraggler from Softpedia,
Running it now and it’s stinking through defragging my system, But you are correct, If anyone can write a “Usefull” system utility it should be the OS maufacturer, sigh,
But anyway, Good call,
Neil..
11:27 am
January 16th, 2009
Hi Neil,
Glad you’re finding Defraggler useful. It’s a well written application and does the job quickly and well.
I gave up on Vista over a year ago and have been happily running XP since. In fact I’ve recently installed Xubuntu on my laptop (dual-booting with XP) and have been pretty happy with that. I think it will be a while before I can say goodbye to Windows though as there are a number of applications that I can only use on Windows.
I’d be interested to hear whether Windows 7 has reverted the defrag UI to include a progress display!
Alex
4:54 am
April 23rd, 2009
Meh. I not only miss the GUI, I miss the speed that XP defragged at. It never took me more than 45 minutes or so to defrag in XP, with a full hard drive. Now I’m using vista and have a whole 20Gigs of disk space in use. I started the defrag before I left for class at six. It’s now 10:52, defrag is still running, and I have NO clue how much has been done or when it will be complete. LAME. I just put Windows 7 on my other machine, though, so I’ll find out soon whether any improvements were made.
1:15 pm
October 25th, 2009
The only defrag program without a progress indicator.
4:22 am
December 23rd, 2009
I hate this with an utter vengeance … bloody SIX HOURS LATER and I DO NOT KNOW how far it is. This really sucks, I have things to do … and the defrag is STILL not done. This is ridiculous.
1:30 pm
April 9th, 2010
Rowena I’d suggest that you install Defraggler:
http://www.filehippo.com/download_defraggler/
2:20 pm
November 3rd, 2010
I ran into the same issue on a Win 2008 server, and it’s not just the pretty graphics that were removed. They also removed the View Report button where you could actually see a list of the most fragmented files. I work with a database app (based on a Microsoft product, naturally) that fragments report tables with amazing speed. The fragmented tables significantly slow reports that utilize those tables. A hard drive could show itself as being only 1% fragmented, but if that 1% happens to be those particular tables then I have all kinds of trouble. Without being able to see which files are fragmented, I don’t know if the defrag program is right when it says the disk doesn’t need a defrag.
1:55 am
April 2nd, 2011
another disgruntled defragger here.
what they do not take into account is the fact that not all of us leave our computers running all the time. I have a lenovo laptop and I generally put it into hibernate when not in use. it bothers me that I have to leave it on for an unknown amount of time in order to accomplish this task.
9:47 am
March 17th, 2012
I agree, I want to know when I can switch the computer off without wasting hours of defragmenting time by cancelling it as the computer shuts down. I also have a suspicion that my defragmentation is not working the way it should be. The graphics at least show that.
10:13 am
March 21st, 2012
It really is remarkable. I installed the Windows 8 Consumer Preview recently as a test, but I forgot to check what they’ve done with the defrag functionality. Damn!
Anyway, the simple answer is definitely to install Piriform’s Defraggler. It’s great and gives you very solid information as to what is going on.
9:33 am
July 19th, 2012
The comments ms has given is unacceptable and totally stupid. I personally like to check the progress of disc defragmentation.Then I can decide to let it run or abandon it depending the time left to completion. Ms should upgrade the disc defragmentation in win7 and give the users the options to monitor or not to monitor. Ms should do the right things, and that is how the users wish to run their system and it is not for ms to dictate the users.
7:15 pm
August 29th, 2012
“Most users will never run a defrag interactively..”
MS is assuming here that defragmenting will run quietly in the background over a weekend or other time. BULL CRAP. I shut my PC OFF when not in use. If I’m using it, I don’t want a defrag running. If I’m going to run it directly, I want to have some idea how long it’s going be. 1 minute 1 hour or 1 day.
Just another annoyance from MS. I already went to Open Office instead of dealing with the insane menu organization of Office 2007. Maybe it’s time I move to a Unix based OS too.
12:03 pm
September 11th, 2012
I rely on the graphical analysis to visually judge (“No matter how inaccurate”) how bad the fragmentation really is. It all relative anyway but does at least give some idea of severity and progress. In the new menu I do not get a feel for severity over time. Shame on you microsoft for not polling the Operations community on such an important tool.
3:30 pm
September 12th, 2012
I use Vista and do not defrag as much as I should, so when I came to defrag my large C: hard disc I have been waiting two days, I dont know if I will be informed of completion or of I will get a report. I do not know if it resumes when I restart or if it starts again from scratch. I defragged my old XP computer and got a report of files that could not be moved and the location. I found the guilty files 5.4GB and found I could not delete the file. I uninstalled the program containing the guilty file and everything went except the guilty file. I re installed the program and the folder holding the guilty file was overwtitten and the file dissapeared. In Vista i would just have to suffer the guilty file because I would be have been non the wiser. That XP report was a godsend as my XP system is only 40GB. MS pay attention please.
6:43 pm
April 18th, 2013
I HATE not having a display of progress. I , at first was not sure if it was actually defragmenting or that it had frozen to this screen.
But now on this page, i see yall saying the same thing. I just wonder how long it will take until its done defragmenting. Its been going for 3 hours now.