To defrag or not,that is the question.

[p-39driver]

Hi all!
I'm running XP Pro,service pack 3.
The question is as stated in the topic.

This argument has been going for some
time between myself,and some collegues.

One states that XP NEVER needs to be de-fragged.

The other states that if everything is running as normal,why bother(if it ain't broke,don't fix it).

Another states that it does it on it's own(huh?).

If XP pro does need to be de-fragged here and there,which of the following is the best route to take:

Good old Norton speed disc?

Or...

Windows XP disc defragmenter?

I'm tempted to go with the "if it ain't broke,don't fix it",as all systems are "go",
no problems.

Many thanks...

Chris

[RockinRobbins]

There are plenty of opinions to keep you confused. I assume you have never defragged your disk. Why don't you pull up Windows Defrag and tell us what your fragmentation percentage is when you analyze?

Then if it's at least 40% fragmented, why not try some common operations that you can replicate and note how long it takes to complete each one.

Then go ahead and defrag with Norton Speed Disk.

After you're done with that try the exact same operations and let us know if they went faster.

From my own personal experience, I defrag not to speed up the computer but to increase reliability of read/write functions. I also have a complete backup system in place so any damage potentially caused by defrag processes is much less scary.

[tambor198]

Just to add one word to what RR has already said.


DEFRAG.

[p-39driver]

Thanks!
Last de-frag was December,2007.
XP tells me that my HDD is 10%
fragmented,no de-frag needed.

Yes,I have de-fragged before.
After any major un-install,and before
any major install of new software.

The whole thing arose out of various
opinoions amongst my co-workers,all
of whom claim to be "experts".

Once again...
Many thanks!