Apple says defrag is not necessary, how true is it? Do you all see a speed boost after defragment?
And the reason you don't defrag is because OS X organises the drive for fast access to important files, IIRC.
Why would we all be defragging if Apple said it was unnecessary?
And the reason you don't defrag is because OS X organises the drive for fast access to important files, IIRC.
If there is an absolute no need to defrag, then why are people wasting their time writing software for defragment?
If there is an absolute no need to defrag, then why are people wasting their time writing software for defragment?
The thought of defragging my mac has never crossed my mind.
That's not true. UFS has the ability to split clusters, and these splits are called fragments. It is NOT the same thing as a 'fragment' in terms of 'defragmentation.' This confuses many people, because Linux and possibly BSDs would show a fragmentation % at boot, and they assume it indicates how fragmented the drive is. It is actually telling you how much of the drive is these small allocations.Actually, defragmenting will temporarily slow the system down as OS X (in common with other Unices) is designed to work with a certain level of fragmentation.
This is mostly true.. The number I've seen is that after the system (10.3+) has been up for 3 or 5 minutes, it will automatically defragment files of 20MB or less when they are accessed. That doesn't take care of free-space fragmentation, and obviously doesn't take care of larger files, such as caches. FYI, there is a command-line tool for NT called contig.exe that you can use to do the same thing, manually. It works on any file size, and on directories.All the file defragmentation that is actually required is carried out by OS X in the background.
same hereThe thought of defragging my mac has never crossed my mind.
No I didn't read the thread but why would you even feel that you would need it?