Can a Mac be Defraged?

[TyleRomeo]

right now i have an IBM but looking for a Power Mac for editing....anyway I know that all PCs can be defraged so the hard drive is cleaned up and things work better but i just heard that Macs don't do this.

am i getting misleading information?

does Apple have its own way of cleaning the computer?

anyone know what im talking about

 

[jelloshotsrule]

that's not accurate info.

as far as i know the defragmenting one can do on a mac using a drive utility is the same as for a pc...

some smarter people will correct me if i'm wrong, but there are several tools you can use to do this on a mac.

 

[Rower_CPU]

jello's right.
You'll need a 3rd party application, such as Drive 10, for defragging your drives. Especially since you're doing video work, which can fragment a drive faster than anything else.

 

[xlemming]

mac file system

you don't really need to defragment your mac.

PC's use a ****ty file system developed by microsoft called FAT32. since this is such a bad file system they need to be defragmented.

Macs use Mac OS extended as its file system. What Apple doesn't tell you that Mac OS extended is also known as HFS+ a very common unix and linux file system. This type of file system needs almost no defragmentation because it has been worked on for years and is very efficent, in other words it doesn't screw up like pc's do. And pc people don't like mac's because mac disks don't work; they say mac has its own propreitary file system. Little do they know that it is actually windows with its own proprietary file system.

 

[Rower_CPU]

Re: mac file system

Originally posted by xlemming
you don't really need to defragment your mac.

PC's use a ****ty file system developed by microsoft called FAT32. since this is such a bad file system they need to be defragmented.

Macs use Mac OS extended as its file system. What Apple doesn't tell you that Mac OS extended is also known as HFS+ a very common unix and linux file system. This type of file system needs almost no defragmentation because it has been worked on for years and is very efficent, in other words it doesn't screw up like pc's do. And pc people don't like mac's because mac disks don't work; they say mac has its own propreitary file system. Little do they know that it is actually windows with its own proprietary file system.

PCs also use NTFS, which is a much better file system that doesn't need as much defragging.
HFS+ is a Mac file system. OS X gives the option to use UFS, which is the Unix file system.
Each system has its own "proprietary" file system.

For video work, on any platform, you need to defrag your drives often.

 

[xlemming]

no my friend is running a few different version of linux and unix including freebsd on an x86 computer and he uses HFS+.
NTFS only funs on windows NT, 2000, and XP

 

[chmorley]

Defragging

You can. You can use Norton Speed Disk, which works almost exactly as it does on the PC (except you have to boot from the CD). Drive 10 does not defrag, although they promote it like it does.

Chris

 

[mcrain]

I don't know much about defragging macs, but I can give you hings on how you too can deflower young impressionable girls.

 

[Rower_CPU]

xlemming-
I was not aware that HFS+ ran on other systems. Thanks for the info.
I am fully aware that NTFS runs only on XP/NT/2K systems. Your original post made it sound like FAT32 was the only option for PCs, that's why I corrected you.

chmorley-
Thanks for the correction. It seems rather odd that an app marketed as a drive utility wouldn't defrag.

 

[jelloshotsrule]

drive 10

yeah, i didn't think drive 10 defragged but i just figured i was wrong and rower was right... ha

it's especially odd because tech tool pro does defrag and that's by the same company as drive 10, right?

i actually have been rebooting in 9 to defrag via tech tool... not so bad since it's not too often that i do it..

 

[mc68k]

Re: drive 10

Originally posted by jelloshotsrule
yeah, i didn't think drive 10 defragged but i just figured i was wrong and rower was right... ha

it's especially odd because tech tool pro does defrag and that's by the same company as drive 10, right?

i actually have been rebooting in 9 to defrag via tech tool... not so bad since it's not too often that i do it..

Yeah, Micromat makes both TechTool and Drive 10.

Personally I would steer clear from drive 10 until it has more features. I installed it on my system a while back and was really dissapointed.

There is currently NO utility that I know of that will natively defrag OS X. And believe me, when i look at the fragment report, X really trashes things around.

It's faster and easier to defrag in OS 9. I typically use Speed Disk as a standalone application outside of the Norton Utils set, because I don't like Norton Utils.

I much prefer TechToolPro for any disk operation 9 or X. I had a bad experience once where I was defragging my X partition and TechTool got to a point where it kept moving the same blocks on the disk back and forth for an hour 'till I quit it.

So I use Speed Disk for defragging and TechTool for everything else. TechTool has fixed every disk problem that I have ever had. Norton sometimes has told me "I can't fix this", whereas TechTool will say, "I can fix this, but it may be ugly" and gives you an option if you want to proceed. I have recovered disks before that Norton "pansied" out on and I would have lost otherwise. That's why I'm bitter.

 

[chmorley]

10 native defragging

Fo' sho'--can't do it. When NU defrags, it does so by booting into 9. I am told it also optimizes for 9--putting those system files first. This seems retarded, but fits with Symantec's half-measures for the Mac.

Clearly, it doesn't matter what system is running when you are optimizing a drive, as long as it puts the right files first. Some smart guy at another forum (I forget which) recently pointed out that you can create an optimization profile that puts any 4 folders you want at the "front" of the disk. Obviously, you could put OS X's "System" folder first, followed by Libraries and Applications (or whatever you like). This should optimize the drive just right for OS X. I haven't had the opportunity to try it yet, but it sounds like it should work.

Drive 10 is harmless and all, but it's also less useful than I would have hoped. It's certainly not "the only disk utility" I will ever need for OS X. I have yet to find anything it can fix as well as NDD--a surprising disappointment from Micromat.

Chris

 

[TyleRomeo]

thanx guys

at least i know that there is hope to defraging on OSX in the near future

 

[jelloshotsrule]

Re: 10 native defragging

Originally posted by chmorley
Some smart guy at another forum (I forget which) recently pointed out that you can create an optimization profile that puts any 4 folders you want at the "front" of the disk. Obviously, you could put OS X's "System" folder first, followed by Libraries and Applications (or whatever you like). This should optimize the drive just right for OS X. I haven't had the opportunity to try it yet, but it sounds like it should work.

let us know if you figure that out. i'd be interested to try it if given some instructions (i'm incompetent with terminal stuff....)

 

[Gelfin]

HFS+ is not a UNIX filesystem. It is a Macintosh filesystem which is supported by Linux and some BSDs.

And all filesystems can benefit from defragmentation. Some formats just do not show the effects of fragmentation as dramatically as FAT-type filesystems.

 

[AlphaTech]

Re: 10 native defragging

Originally posted by chmorley
Fo' sho'--can't do it. When NU defrags, it does so by booting into 9. I am told it also optimizes for 9--putting those system files first. This seems retarded, but fits with Symantec's half-measures for the Mac.

A few things... I use a trilogy of utilites for system health/maintenance on all Mac systems. I run them in the following order... DiskWarrior 2, TechTool Pro 3.x, and Norton System Works (NUM 6). I don't let TechTool Pro defrag, since I have found that NUM does a better job, and does it faster too. All three utilities have their strengths and weaknesses, which is why I run all three. I don't bother with the virus checking under TTP, nor do I let it check for software compatibility issues.

I run all three utilities off of a bootable cd (boots into 9.2.1) and have never had any problems using it on OS X drives. I also recently picked up NSW2, and installed the stuff onto my TiBook (only running OS X) and haven't seen any of the issues that used to plague installing NUM onto computers (running OS 9.x). If you choose to install the latest NUM onto an OS X drive, I recommend not installing any of the 'extra' items, but just the utilities you want. I have seen crashguard bring down systems more times then not.

As for NUM optimizing for OS 9.x, I've found that it does an excellent job on file and space fragmentation (both free and used). NUM 6.0.3 can easily handle files for OS X as well as 9.x. I have both operating systems on my G4 at work, on a single partition, and have never had an issue caused by Speed Disk, or Disk Doctor either.

M$ software (such as office and outlook) causes more issues then the NUM ever could. Which is one reason I avoid them at home (except for IE).