Is MyDefrag dead?

[T]

Hi All,

My Defrag's web site is gone.

http://www.mydefrag.com

Is this now a dead project?

-T

[Good Guy]

http://www.downforeveryoneorjustme.com/mydefrag.com

The domain doesn't expire until Dec 2016!!

Domain Name: MYDEFRAG.COM
   Registrar: ENOM, INC.
   Sponsoring Registrar IANA ID: 48
   Whois Server: whois.enom.com
   Referral URL: http://www.enom.com
   Name Server: NS1.KESSELS.COM
   Name Server: NS2.KESSELS.COM
   Status: clientTransferProhibited https://icann.org/epp#clientTransferProhibited
   Updated Date: 09-dec-2015
   Creation Date: 14-dec-2008
   Expiration Date: 14-dec-2016

--

This post contains rich text (HTML). if you don't like it then you can kill-filter the poster without crying about it like a small baby so that you don't see this poster's posts ever again.

This message is best read in Mozilla Thunderbird as it uses 21st century technology.

[VanguardLH]

T wrote:

> My Defrag's web site is gone.
> http://www.mydefrag.com
>
> Is this now a dead project?

Domain registration:

Updated Date: 09-dec-2015
Creation Date: 14-dec-2008
Expiration Date: 14-dec-2016

So the domain has not yet expired but it looks like it has not been
maintained.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MyDefrag
Development status: Unmaintained
Stable release: 4.3.1 (May 21, 2010)

So it has not been updated in *6 YEARS*. See the "Discontinuation"
section in the wiki article. Been dead for 6 years. Site disappeared
Jun 2015. http://web.archive.org/web/*/mydefrag.com shows they stopped
snapshotting that site back in Sep 2015.

[B00ze]

Yup, dead. Should've sold it instead of giving it for free; nothing
comes close to it, it's a real shame it's dead. Apparently he did sell
it to some; that's the reason he gave, if I recall, for not
open-sourcing the code. Note that it still works just fine here on Win7.
I run it offline in WinPE once in a while; had to work at getting the
32bit version tho, as the installer installs the 64bit executable if you
run it on a 64bit O/S...

Regards,

--
! _\|/_ Sylvain / B00...@hotmail.com
! (o o) Member:David-Suzuki-Fdn/EFF/Red+Cross/SPCA/Planetary-Society-
oO-( )-Oo Tamarian mugger: "Temba, his arms up, NOW, suckah!"

[Ammammata]

Il giorno Thu 21 Apr 2016 03:32:12a, *T* inviava su
microsoft.public.windowsxp.general il messaggio news:nf9ach$7bk$2@dont-
email.me. Vediamo cosa scrisse:

>
> Is this now a dead project?
>
>

I don't care

since they updated to mydefrag 4, I went on with stand-alone jkdefrag 3.36

--
/-\ /\/\ /\/\ /-\ /\/\ /\/\ /-\ T /-\
-=- -=- -=- -=- -=- -=- -=- -=- - -=-
>>>>> http://www.bb2002.it :) <<<<<
........... [ al lavoro ] ...........

[Ammammata]

Il giorno Thu 21 Apr 2016 03:32:12a, *T* inviava su
microsoft.public.windowsxp.general il messaggio news:nf9ach$7bk$2@dont-
email.me. Vediamo cosa scrisse:

>

> Is this now a dead project?
>
>

Discontinuation

On June 23, 2015, the author of MyDefrag announced that the official
website including the forum would be shut down on October 1st 2015.[7]

In the announcement, the author said it was unlikely that he would pick up
the development of MyDefrag again, and that he had decided not to release
the source code of the software as several clients had bought a license to
it. He said he would need to keep the source code closed in order to
protect the clients' investment, but that he hoped that MyDefrag in its
existing form, "still the best defragger/optimizer" would remain available
from freeware sites.

Address : <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MyDefrag>

[Ammammata]

Il giorno Thu 21 Apr 2016 03:32:12a, *T* inviava su
microsoft.public.windowsxp.general il messaggio news:nf9ach$7bk$2@dont-
email.me. Vediamo cosa scrisse:

>

> http://www.mydefrag.com
>
> Is this now a dead project?
>
>

The main reason for this is that the hosting company where the website is
located, is closing it's doors. I am forced to either move the website, or
shut it down.
Address :
<http://web.archive.org/web/20150811002106/http://www.mydefrag.com/forum/in
dex.php?topic=80646.0>

it looks me an extraordinary excuse, I don't think he hasn't those few
bucks to put on a website, even simply a download page, on a different host
in Italy you can get one for just 19 euro per year

[VanguardLH]

Looks like he did sell it. The wiki article notes that he did not
release the source code because he had sold it to other developers and
didn't want to betray them by pulling the rug out from under their feet.
They paid for a fork of the code, so releasing the code would mean their
investment cost was wasted.

He made some money, grew weary of his old project, and left. Happens
all the time, especially with freeware.

[Micky]

[Default] On Thu, 21 Apr 2016 06:20:27 +0000 (UTC), in
microsoft.public.windowsxp.general Ammammata <amma...@tiscalinet.it>
wrote:

>Il giorno Thu 21 Apr 2016 03:32:12a, *T* inviava su
>microsoft.public.windowsxp.general il messaggio news:nf9ach$7bk$2@dont-
>email.me. Vediamo cosa scrisse:
>
>>
>> Is this now a dead project?
>>
>>
>
>Discontinuation
>
>On June 23, 2015, the author of MyDefrag announced that the official
>website including the forum would be shut down on October 1st 2015.[7]
>
>In the announcement, the author said it was unlikely that he would pick up
>the development of MyDefrag again, and that he had decided not to release
>the source code of the software as several clients had bought a license to
>it. He said he would need to keep the source code closed in order to
>protect the clients' investment, but that he hoped that MyDefrag in its
>existing form, "still the best defragger/optimizer" would remain available
>from freeware sites.
>
>Address : <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MyDefrag>

v. 4.3.1 seems to be around.
http://filehippo.com/download_mydefrag/download/de3df29ce34ce75c4bed76428f7521f7/

But why do you have to defrag. With bigger, faster disks, I thought
it was much less important.

[Micky]

[Default] On Thu, 21 Apr 2016 21:25:30 -0400, in
microsoft.public.windowsxp.general Micky

<NONONObobb...@gmail.com> wrote:

>
>>Discontinuation
>>
>>On June 23, 2015, the author of MyDefrag announced that the official
>>website including the forum would be shut down on October 1st 2015.[7]
>>
>>In the announcement, the author said it was unlikely that he would pick up
>>the development of MyDefrag again, and that he had decided not to release
>>the source code of the software as several clients had bought a license to
>>it. He said he would need to keep the source code closed in order to
>>protect the clients' investment, but that he hoped that MyDefrag in its
>>existing form, "still the best defragger/optimizer" would remain available
>>from freeware sites.
>>
>>Address : <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MyDefrag>
>
>v. 4.3.1 seems to be around.
>http://filehippo.com/download_mydefrag/download/de3df29ce34ce75c4bed76428f7521f7/
>
>But why do you have to defrag. With bigger, faster disks, I thought
>it was much less important.

And this one says it's good for win10. Maybe it is. Why shoudl
anyone criticize the author?

http://www.majorgeeks.com/files/details/mydefrag.html

[Nil]

On 21 Apr 2016, Micky <NONONObobb...@gmail.com> wrote in
microsoft.public.windowsxp.general:

> v. 4.3.1 seems to be around.
> http://filehippo.com/download_mydefrag/download/de3df29ce34ce75c4bed76428f7521f7/
>
> But why do you have to defrag. With bigger, faster disks, I
> thought it was much less important.

"Less important" does not equal "unimportant".

Not every disk is big and fast.

Even big and fast disks can fill up.

Windows XP doesn't automatically defrag disks like Windows 7 and
later do.

MyDefrag and some other 3rd party defraggers do a faster and more
thorough job than Windows's own.

etc.

[Micky]

[Default] On Thu, 21 Apr 2016 22:15:55 -0400, in
microsoft.public.windowsxp.general Nil

<redn...@REMOVETHIScomcast.net> wrote:

>On 21 Apr 2016, Micky <NONONObobb...@gmail.com> wrote in
>microsoft.public.windowsxp.general:
>
>> v. 4.3.1 seems to be around.
>> http://filehippo.com/download_mydefrag/download/de3df29ce34ce75c4bed76428f7521f7/
>>
>> But why do you have to defrag. With bigger, faster disks, I
>> thought it was much less important.
>
>"Less important" does not equal "unimportant".
>
>Not every disk is big and fast.
>
>Even big and fast disks can fill up.

Actually I used to have big drives but the drive I have now is only 75
gig and 81% full. I'm not installing any more big files but they ones
here are growing and I have to do something soon.

>
>Windows XP doesn't automatically defrag disks like Windows 7 and
>later do.

By golly, so does Vista, and not only that, it's turned on on my
computer and last ran at 1 this morning!! It is set for weekly on
Wednesday and I'm usually up then. I wonder if that ever was the
straw that broke the camel's back for a computer with only 2gigs RAM
that often runs slow.

>
>MyDefrag and some other 3rd party defraggers do a faster and more
>thorough job than Windows's own.

That's the impression I got. I dl'd it earlier and I'll look into
it. Whoever brought the topic up, thanks, and thank you, Red.

>etc.

[Paul]

Defragmentation and file position optimization are
two different things.

The Sysinternals "contig" program, is an example of a
"pure defragmenter". It is happy if all the clusters
are in a row. It doesn't care where on the disk the file
ends up. It does no position optimization at all.

WinXP defragmenter has a simple optimization policy.
Not only does it defragment files, it also "slams them
to the left". It also does something with regard to
prefetch files (that's one of its other jobs).

Win7/Win8/Win10, the defragmenter design is no longer
done by President Software. It's a Microsoft design. It
doesn't "slam" to the left exactly. It can leave small gaps
between files and be happy with that. The files are
"mostly to the left". It is not supposed to touch files
over 50MB in size or so, as there likely
isn't a good performance reason to optimize data files
that big. It has no block display, because the end users
would be "petrified" if they saw the block pattern :-)

And if you use the JKDefrag option to just display the
"colored blocks",

(In an Administrator command prompt window...)

JkDefrag.exe -a 1 -d 2 c:

you'll see the Microsoft defragmenter does a damn good job. It's a good tradeoff
of "quality of defrag", versus the time spent on it.
And if you let the scheduled operation run regularly,
the level of fragmentation seen by the user is
relatively small.

It's still possible to "massacre" a modern C: drive. The
thing that kills them, is if NTFS compression is used
on WinSXS area. Any time that area is scanned later,
for whatever reason, it runs a lot slower. And this might
have to do with the way the NTFS compression leave gaps
in the file it works on. If you do a "cleanmgr.exe" run,
select some options and you find it takes 3 hours
to finish, it's been off compressing infrequently referenced
files. And it's not exactly easy to remove that, without
side effects. (The utility to do that, messes up the ownership
of the files. There are recipes for dealing with that,
but it's still a lot more work than it should be.)

One difference between JKDefrag and MyDefrag (both written
by the same guy), it MyDefrag was supposed to add scripting
capability. So you could define your own optimization policies.
As an example of one I'd like, is "slam to the right plus
defragment". The idea is, you remove the frequently referenced
files from the disk, and leave the "cruft" you have no reason
to look at. By "slam to the right", that moves the infrequently
referenced files onto the slow part of the disk. Then, later,
when you add your new, important files, they on the left hand
part of the disk, which is up to twice as fast. That would
be an example of something I might want to program into a
defragmenter. JKDefrag had some "canned" patterns, but
by offering scripting, that should allow people with
their own ideas, to test them out.

Paul

[Micky]

[Default] On Fri, 22 Apr 2016 01:31:53 -0400, in

LOL I used to be hypnotized watching the blocks fill up and empty
out. And for a while I had two defraggers, the one that came with
98 or XP, and one I dl'd, and one would slam the files to the left,
and the other would put half on the left and half on the right. So
if one alternated programs, each one ALWAYS said you had a major need
to run it. (So I didn't alternate, but I wouldn't be surprised if
someone who didn't look at the display did.)

>
>And if you use the JKDefrag option to just display the
>"colored blocks",
>
> (In an Administrator command prompt window...)
>
> JkDefrag.exe -a 1 -d 2 c:
>
>you'll see the Microsoft defragmenter does a damn good job. It's a good tradeoff
>of "quality of defrag", versus the time spent on it.
>And if you let the scheduled operation run regularly,
>the level of fragmentation seen by the user is
>relatively small.
>
>It's still possible to "massacre" a modern C: drive. The
>thing that kills them, is if NTFS compression is used
>on WinSXS area. Any time that area is scanned later,
>for whatever reason, it runs a lot slower. And this might
>have to do with the way the NTFS compression leave gaps
>in the file it works on. If you do a "cleanmgr.exe" run,
>select some options and you find it takes 3 hours
>to finish, it's been off compressing infrequently referenced
>files. And it's not exactly easy to remove that, without
>side effects. (The utility to do that, messes up the ownership
>of the files. There are recipes for dealing with that,
>but it's still a lot more work than it should be.)

For this and other reasons (well, I didn't know about this, but there
seem to be many reasons) I've never used compression. I don't save
videos or even audios or a lot of pictures, and this spring is the
first time in years I've been anywhere close to filling a drive.

I bought new big drives for a new computer, just have to set aside
time to set it up.

>One difference between JKDefrag and MyDefrag (both written

I thought MyDefrag was written for Mr. Myagisan.

(from the Karate Kid)

[Ammammata]

Il giorno Fri 22 Apr 2016 03:25:30a, *Micky* inviava su
microsoft.public.windowsxp.general il messaggio
news:navihbp6pife62o89...@4ax.com. Vediamo cosa scrisse:

> But why do you have to defrag. With bigger, faster disks, I thought
> it was much less important.
>

it wasn't me ;)
I use an SSD, so who cares?

[Good Guy]

On 22/04/2016 02:25, Micky wrote:

But why do you have to defrag.

It keeps jobless people busy.  Their day begins with backing up their machine;  when this is done they start defragging their HD; When this is done they need to install unnecessary patches;  When this is done they need to cry about these patches messing up their machine; when this is done it is time to go to bed.

Next day this schedule is followed line by line.

[Good Guy]

On 22/04/2016 14:57, Ammammata wrote:

I use an SSD, so who cares?

jobless people!  It is part of their daily routine.

[T]

On 04/22/2016 10:57 AM, Good Guy wrote:
> /*This post contains rich text (HTML). if you don't like it then you can

> kill-filter the poster without crying about it like a small baby so that

> you don't see this poster's posts ever again.*/
>
> /*This message is best read in Mozilla Thunderbird as it uses 21st
> century technology.*/
>


Blue on Yellow? Red on Yellow? Could you have picked an *uglier*
or *harder to read* color scheme?

You would have made a better point if you had improved on something
using html rather that made your posts (which I like, by the way)
harder to read.

Damn that yellow is *UGLY*

[B00ze]

On 2016-04-22 01:31, Paul <nos...@needed.com> wrote:

> One difference between JKDefrag and MyDefrag (both written
> by the same guy), it MyDefrag was supposed to add scripting
> capability. So you could define your own optimization policies.

It DOES add scripting, I have custom scripts for all my partitions. No
other defragmenter has it, which is why it's a shame the author of
MyDefrag decided to quit :-(

Here's how I manage my C: partition (from left to right, with gaps
between most zones):

Zone 1/2: NTFS System Files and Directories (50% into VolumeUsed)
Zone 3/4: Hiberfil.sys / Pagefile.sys
Zone 5: Constantly Changing Files
Zone 6: Files used when booting
Zone 7: Files accessed this month < 32MB
Zone 8: Remaining files < 32MB
Zone 9: Remaining files by size

But it's hard to tell if it really makes a difference to using
Microsoft's defragmenter, lol.

Regards,

--
! _\|/_ Sylvain / B00...@hotmail.com
! (o o) Member:David-Suzuki-Fdn/EFF/Red+Cross/SPCA/Planetary-Society-

oO-( )-Oo I am Descartes of Borg: I Assimilate, Therefore I Am.