I too think Vista Defrag sucks too, it's just stupid to have a process
without at least a status bar showing percent of process complete. Every
install package, tool, utility, etc. all show a status bar of process
complete.
You MVP's may be geeks but your own arrogance about what you think users
need is regrettable. Obviously the overwhelming opinion of knolwageable
users indicate they want a more descritive "defrag" process.
I managed system engineers most of my career at Boeing (BCS) and understood
the customers (users) requirements. You just ignor them. Wonder if Balmer
knows about this issue and your inability to satisfy your customers ?????
--
Retired Boeing Bill

----------------
This post is a suggestion for Microsoft, and Microsoft responds to the
suggestions with the most votes. To vote for this suggestion, click the "I
Agree" button in the message pane. If you do not see the button, follow this
link to open the suggestion in the Microsoft Web-based Newsreader and then
click "I Agree" in the message pane.



http://windowshelp.microsoft.com/com....vista.general

Retired Bill wrote :

> I too think Vista Defrag sucks too, it's just stupid to have a process
> without at least a status bar showing percent of process complete. Every
> install package, tool, utility, etc. all show a status bar of process
> complete.

Read this about the defrag:
http://blogs.technet.com/filecab/articles/440717.aspx

> You MVP's may be geeks but your own arrogance about what you think users
> need is regrettable.
> ...

I am fully agree, and I still not know who test the vista beta version
(Or any other beta version, e.g. look at the IE) , where the result of
the beta phase influence the finished product, and/or if someone from
MS, not this MVP guys other MS experts, read ever any feature request
or comments from the USERS, specifically "normal" Users.

Peter

yes it is.. I have posted numerous times about this.. yet the vistaboys
don't seem to understand...

strange how people can have so diverse views about clearly logical and
undeniable facts!

:-)



"Retired Bill" <RetiredBill@xxxxxx> wrote in message
news:2D3F9EDC-0983-43AF-B2C8-7812C0FD9BDC@xxxxxx

>I too think Vista Defrag sucks too, it's just stupid to have a process
> without at least a status bar showing percent of process complete. Every
> install package, tool, utility, etc. all show a status bar of process
> complete.
> You MVP's may be geeks but your own arrogance about what you think users
> need is regrettable. Obviously the overwhelming opinion of knolwageable
> users indicate they want a more descritive "defrag" process.
> I managed system engineers most of my career at Boeing (BCS) and
> understood
> the customers (users) requirements. You just ignor them. Wonder if
> Balmer
> knows about this issue and your inability to satisfy your customers ?????
> --
> Retired Boeing Bill
>
> ----------------
> This post is a suggestion for Microsoft, and Microsoft responds to the
> suggestions with the most votes. To vote for this suggestion, click the "I
> Agree" button in the message pane. If you do not see the button, follow
> this
> link to open the suggestion in the Microsoft Web-based Newsreader and then
> click "I Agree" in the message pane.
>
> http://windowshelp.microsoft.com/com....vista.general

There are numerous free and for sale defrags you can use that have all the
bells and whistles you want to pay for. Some will even delete your restore
points.

"Retired Bill" <RetiredBill@xxxxxx> wrote in message
news:2D3F9EDC-0983-43AF-B2C8-7812C0FD9BDC@xxxxxx

>I too think Vista Defrag sucks too, it's just stupid to have a process
> without at least a status bar showing percent of process complete. Every
> install package, tool, utility, etc. all show a status bar of process
> complete.
> You MVP's may be geeks but your own arrogance about what you think users
> need is regrettable. Obviously the overwhelming opinion of knolwageable
> users indicate they want a more descritive "defrag" process.
> I managed system engineers most of my career at Boeing (BCS) and
> understood
> the customers (users) requirements. You just ignor them. Wonder if
> Balmer
> knows about this issue and your inability to satisfy your customers ?????
> --
> Retired Boeing Bill
>
> ----------------
> This post is a suggestion for Microsoft, and Microsoft responds to the
> suggestions with the most votes. To vote for this suggestion, click the "I
> Agree" button in the message pane. If you do not see the button, follow
> this
> link to open the suggestion in the Microsoft Web-based Newsreader and then
> click "I Agree" in the message pane.
>
> http://windowshelp.microsoft.com/com....vista.general

"Retired Bill" <RetiredBill@xxxxxx> wrote...

> You MVP's may be geeks but your own arrogance about what you think users
> need is regrettable. Obviously the overwhelming opinion of knolwageable

Hi Bill,

Boeing is a respected company with a proud tradition of engineering
excellence. Some years ago, I did some work with TOP networks ("Technichal
Office Protocol") a networking standard which was developed under Boeing's
guidance. It was a really solid product.

On a minor point of, um, blame and responsibility ... be aware that MVPs are
*not* Microsoft employees; and in fact, often MVPs only have a tenuous
formal association with Microsoft (often none, apart from an MVP
certificate). In my experience, MVPs have little influence on product
design - we occassionally get polled by product groups, but that would be a
extremely tiny component of the team's overall design input. Certainly,
no-one ever asked me about the design of the new defrag, before it appeared
in the beta!

MVPs may indeed be arrogant, but ... that's a separate proposition :-)

Your comments would probably be more appropriately directed at Microsoft
program managers, product managers and developers.

On the defrag thing ... well, I agree with your general propsition that
there needs to be better feedback between users and product design at
Microsoft. Too many features in Vista seem randomly changed, overly complex,
too much work for too little return, or just broken. However, I happen to
think the redesign of Defrag doesn't fall into this category, it was
actually a *good* thing.

Back during the Vista beta, many of us asked "what the hell happened to
Defrag? Where's the UI?" It turned out that the graphical display of the
disk in the "old" Defrag was very inaccurate, and only a very loose
impression of what was happening on the disk. Fixing that was non-trivial.
Many of your complaints are addressed in the Defragmenter FAQ, written by
the Storage team at Microsoft:
http://blogs.technet.com/filecab/articles/440717.aspx

But, keep voicing opinions about what you don't like in Vista ... if enough
of us scream loudly enough, we might have some influence on future trends.

Regards,
--
Andrew McLaren
amclar (at) optusnet dot com dot au

On Sun, 23 Sep 2007 04:26:02 -0700, Retired Bill wrote:

> I too think Vista Defrag sucks too, it's just stupid to have a process
> without at least a status bar showing percent of process complete. Every
> install package, tool, utility, etc. all show a status bar of process
> complete.
> You MVP's may be geeks but your own arrogance about what you think users
> need is regrettable. Obviously the overwhelming opinion of knolwageable
> users indicate they want a more descritive "defrag" process.
> I managed system engineers most of my career at Boeing (BCS) and understood
> the customers (users) requirements. You just ignor them. Wonder if Balmer
> knows about this issue and your inability to satisfy your customers ?????

No offense, but it seems rather stupid to me that it's necessary to
defragment a drive in the 21st century. Properly designed file systems for
other operating systems seem to have dispensed with that quite a number of
years ago.

Tiberius wrote:

> yes it is.. I have posted numerous times about this.. yet the vistaboys
> don't seem to understand...
>

Vistaboys? Who the hell are they?
Vista defrags just fine in the background. That's what confuses new
users (you are now using Vista correct capin' crunch?) as they try and
compare Vista's defrag with XP's. Old habits are hard to break for some.
That's the problem with fools like you who can't accept change. Anyway,
please tells us all what background defragmenting has to do with the
efficacy of the app?

> strange how people can have so diverse views about clearly logical and
> undeniable facts!

You just don't get it do you.
Frank

Andrew McLaren wrote :

> ...
> But, keep voicing opinions about what you don't like in Vista ... if enough
> of us scream loudly enough, we might have some influence on future trends.
> ...

That's exactly is the point where I am not sure. How many MS
application I can find where a lot of "normal" users said "WTF? WHY?",
and nothing changes in the next or next but one version?

On the other side the normal IE, Messenger, OS, ... are designed for
the mass market, not for experts, therfore some comments from experts
make not really sense when they said "No need for this".

Peter

Sorry for interrupting the sometimes ugly banter that's pouring on this
thread, but I have a documented opinion, too.
I've installed Windows 2000 for using it as a fail-safe, and just wanted to
know how the Vista's system drive looks like after the scheduled
defragmentation (once a week), because I got no visual representation of the
defragmentation process - I simply wanted to check the background
defragmenter. What I've seen in the Windows 2000 Defragmenter made me sick,
and I haven't fully recovered yet, as it may show...
I've run the Win2000 defrag because I thought like a fool that same file
systems (aka NTFS) would behave the same (aside the improved security on
Vista) when managed by better-and-better management applications. Yeah,
right. The free space on the Vista's system disk is about 50% of the total.
The Win2000's defrag analysis showed up about 50% of the Vista drive files
in red lines, that is 25% of the occupied space was (still) utterly
fragmented. After 1 (one) hour of scheduled defragmentation... Hoping for
the best, I defragged the said drive with Win2000's Defragmenter and the
things got better. Visually, of course, because I have no way of telling if
that 50% of Vista system files have to be fragmented. There were, of course,
files that could not be defragmented, but 50% of NTFS space !...
I continue to work with Vista, though, as the problems are relatively minor
(the experience index app crashes when running the Direct3D ALU test, the
Classic Start menu behaves irresponsibly). For those that already hate this
OS, say only this: install it for testing and aquaintance under VMWare or
VirtualPC, and perform the production work or gaming under XP or 2000
(Win2000 _never_ crashed on 3 of my pc's and I see it as the most reliable
home-use OS). Cheers

> Wonder if Balmer
> knows about this issue and your inability to satisfy your customers ?????
>

Knowing and caring are two different animals. I'm confident he knows.
I'm also confident he doesn't give a flying you-know-what.

Dave