Add WinMe to existing Win2K system?

BTW, isn't it Illegitimus Non Carborundum, and not Nil Carborundum
Illegitemi? As long as we are butchering "Latin," let's do it correctly, eh?

"Walter H Donavan" wrote in message
...
Sorry, Noel.

Have you tried a 3rd party defragger?? Speedisk (norton) perhaps?

)

Noel wrote: "and will simply put the programs as close together as possible,
in any order
(which is why it's so fast). the resulting mess may well be very slow to
load, as the HD has to jump around a lot during the loading of the OS, and
programs therein."

Walter replied: your explanation makes sense. I feel I just got a better
understnding of the defrag process, and I thank you,

However. It took about four hours today to defrag 17 GB using the W2K
defragger. The same process takes roughly ten minutes under WinME. Assuming
pgms actually won't load as fast when defrgged by Win ME (and they don't
seem slow to me), is not being able to use my machine for four hours worth
it? I think not.

What I will probably do, although it is tedious, is rebuild a WME/W2K dual
boot system, with the WME system used only for defragging. I am, btw, a firm
believer that HDDs should be defragged daily (a practice also used by
Windows guru Fred Langa), and I am unwilling to give Windows my HDDs for
several hours a day to do that.

If any of the defraggers recommended by OPs are free, I will try them. It
would be better than destroying a newly rebuilt W2K system and tediously
building a dual boot system.

Anyway, thanks to all.

Walterius,
Old and cranky in Fort Lauderdale

Follow-up: I tried Diskeeper Lite. Although it takes a very long time, it
can run in the background, so it does not tie up the computer. I will use it
and not bother with a dual boot system.

If and when I can afford it on my Social Security income, I will get the
Diskeeper Lite full version.

Thanks to all who replied. I appreciate it.

Walterius
Old, and defragmenting in Fort Lauderdale

Every time you run the defragger in Win2k, it should get somewhat faster, as
the system will be partially optimised already.
Copping and changing defraggers is the worst thing you can possibly do! Each
defragger has its own idea of where files should be put,, and every time you
change the defragger, it has to start the whole process again.
My advice is to stick with the Win2k defragger for a few weeks/months, and
see what the defrag time is at the end of that.

Defrags on the OS host drive are always going to take longer than on a data
drive (which is effectively what your W2K partition is, when defragging from
Win ME), since most of the action takes place on that drive, and differing
usage patterns can change the optimum ordering that Windows decides upon
Why not defrag overnight? - it's what most people do (me? - I just like
watching the blocks moving, but then I'm easily entertainedg)

--
Noel Paton (MS-MVP 2002-2006, Windows)

Nil Carborundum Illegitemi
http://www.crashfixpc.com/millsrpch.htm

http://tinyurl.com/6oztj

Please read http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm on how to post messages to NG's
"Walter H Donavan" wrote in message
...
Noel wrote: "and will simply put the programs as close together as
possible,
in any order
(which is why it's so fast). the resulting mess may well be very slow to
load, as the HD has to jump around a lot during the loading of the OS, and
programs therein."

Walter replied: your explanation makes sense. I feel I just got a better
understnding of the defrag process, and I thank you,

However. It took about four hours today to defrag 17 GB using the W2K
defragger. The same process takes roughly ten minutes under WinME.
Assuming
pgms actually won't load as fast when defrgged by Win ME (and they don't
seem slow to me), is not being able to use my machine for four hours worth
it? I think not.

What I will probably do, although it is tedious, is rebuild a WME/W2K dual
boot system, with the WME system used only for defragging. I am, btw, a
firm
believer that HDDs should be defragged daily (a practice also used by
Windows guru Fred Langa), and I am unwilling to give Windows my HDDs for
several hours a day to do that.

If any of the defraggers recommended by OPs are free, I will try them. It
would be better than destroying a newly rebuilt W2K system and tediously
building a dual boot system.

Anyway, thanks to all.

Walterius,
Old and cranky in Fort Lauderdale

Well, I didn't want to talk about it, but the real reason I wanted to use
the WME defrag was to watch the little blocks move.

Anyway, I'm happy with Diskeeper Lite.

Good choice there in Florida g.

Harry.


"Walter H Donavan" wrote in message
...
Well, I didn't want to talk about it, but the real reason I wanted to use
the WME defrag was to watch the little blocks move.

Anyway, I'm happy with Diskeeper Lite.

Don't forget to run pagedefrag to defragment your paging and in-use
system files. Can makes a difference on overall performance.

John

Walter H Donavan wrote:

Well, I didn't want to talk about it, but the real reason I wanted to use
the WME defrag was to watch the little blocks move.

Anyway, I'm happy with Diskeeper Lite.

Pagedefrag?
That must be part of the paid version, John, or?
It cerytainly isn't available on my free version.

Harry.


"John John" wrote in message
...
Don't forget to run pagedefrag to defragment your paging and in-use
system files. Can makes a difference on overall performance.

John

Walter H Donavan wrote:

Well, I didn't want to talk about it, but the real reason I wanted to
use
the WME defrag was to watch the little blocks move.

Anyway, I'm happy with Diskeeper Lite.

No, it's the free Sysinternals tool he
http://www.sysinternals.com/Utilities/PageDefrag.html

It's for the NT family Operating Systems, I don't think it works on ME.

John

webster72n wrote:

Pagedefrag?
That must be part of the paid version, John, or?
It cerytainly isn't available on my free version.

Harry.


"John John" wrote in message
...

Don't forget to run pagedefrag to defragment your paging and in-use
system files. Can makes a difference on overall performance.

John

Walter H Donavan wrote:


Well, I didn't want to talk about it, but the real reason I wanted to

use

the WME defrag was to watch the little blocks move.

Anyway, I'm happy with Diskeeper Lite.