UltraDefrag

Submit portable freeware that you find here. It helps if you include information like description, extraction instruction, Unicode support, whether it writes to the registry, and so on.

Moderators: usdcs, Andrew Lee, webfork

Message
Author
User avatar
SYSTEM
Posts: 1740
Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2010 1:19 am
Location: Helsinki, Finland

Re: UltraDefrag

#16 Post by SYSTEM » Sun Jan 22, 2012 1:42 am

TP109 wrote:Guess it pays to check not only the database and forums, but also the comments section of similar apps before submitting.
Well, it isn't mandatory. No one will blame you for not checking the comments. In addition, as you can see, the "Suggested by" field can easily be changed after the fact. :)
My YouTube channel | Release date of my 11th playlist: January 26, 2018

TP109
Posts: 483
Joined: Sat Apr 08, 2006 7:12 pm
Location: Illinois/Indiana

Re: UltraDefrag

#17 Post by TP109 » Sun Jan 22, 2012 4:01 am

My error. I misunderstood Bass's comment. The comments seem changed from before. I assumed the app wasn't ready for inclusion because the default configuration file settings and there was a comment about UltraDefrag writing to the hard drive out of the box. That comment is no longer displayed.

User avatar
webfork
Posts: 7515
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 8:06 pm
Location: US, Texas
Contact:

Re: UltraDefrag

#18 Post by webfork » Sun Jan 22, 2012 11:03 am

TP109 wrote:Portable Submission Page: http://www.portablefreeware.com/index.php?id=2228
Thanks for posting. I did some rather intense formatting work, but the PortableFreeware editor doesn't like nested UL tags under OL so I used asterisks instead.
Supporting Net Neutrality - BattleForTheNet | Why this matters | More from EFF.org

User avatar
webfork
Posts: 7515
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 8:06 pm
Location: US, Texas
Contact:

Re: UltraDefrag

#19 Post by webfork » Sun Jan 22, 2012 11:13 am

SYSTEM wrote:UltraDefrag was originally suggested by pagliaro. I have edited the entry accordingly.
Thanks. I've merged all 3 threads that mentioned this program and added a disclaimer to the first post.
Supporting Net Neutrality - BattleForTheNet | Why this matters | More from EFF.org

TP109
Posts: 483
Joined: Sat Apr 08, 2006 7:12 pm
Location: Illinois/Indiana

Re: UltraDefrag

#20 Post by TP109 » Thu Feb 02, 2012 11:02 am

FYI

I installed both the installer and portable versions. However, after uninstalling the nonportable version, I found that the option for boot time defragging became grayed out. With both versions installed, either the portable or installed versions will enable boot time defragging. This makes sense since the regular version is installed to C:\Windows and the System32 folder. Anyway, the UltraDefrag installation instructions at http://ultradefrag.sourceforge.net/hand ... ation.html states, "Note that boot time defragmenter is missing from the portable packages, but all other features are included."

Something to keep in mind concerning the difference between the nonportable and portable versions. Maybe the entry should indicate this?

User avatar
webfork
Posts: 7515
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 8:06 pm
Location: US, Texas
Contact:

Re: UltraDefrag

#21 Post by webfork » Thu Feb 02, 2012 1:44 pm

TP109 wrote:Something to keep in mind concerning the difference between the nonportable and portable versions. Maybe the entry should indicate this?
Yes it should. Posting a rewrite.

Thanks!

Edit: rewrote the entry focusing on the program's primary feature: speed. The FAQ points out its improvement/difference over JKDefrag / MyDefrag (which I use). If I missed anything else key to this program, please post.
Supporting Net Neutrality - BattleForTheNet | Why this matters | More from EFF.org

User avatar
SYSTEM
Posts: 1740
Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2010 1:19 am
Location: Helsinki, Finland

Re: UltraDefrag

#22 Post by SYSTEM » Thu Feb 02, 2012 8:50 pm

I have removed "Intel or AMD processor" from the dependencies, because every single application in the database requires a processor. There is no point mentioning it in the dependencies field.
My YouTube channel | Release date of my 11th playlist: January 26, 2018

User avatar
webfork
Posts: 7515
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 8:06 pm
Location: US, Texas
Contact:

Re: UltraDefrag

#23 Post by webfork » Fri Feb 03, 2012 3:25 pm

SYSTEM wrote:I have removed "Intel or AMD processor" from the dependencies, because every single application in the database requires a processor. There is no point mentioning it in the dependencies field.
There are more x86 processor companies than just AMD an Intel. Really the only one that our users are likely to run into is Via (aka Cyrix or Centaur). Their processors are crap and probably not compatible: http://www.via.com.tw/en/products/processors/ A lot of low-end computers you might get at Wal-Mart are powered by Via.
Supporting Net Neutrality - BattleForTheNet | Why this matters | More from EFF.org

User avatar
SYSTEM
Posts: 1740
Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2010 1:19 am
Location: Helsinki, Finland

Re: UltraDefrag

#24 Post by SYSTEM » Sat Feb 04, 2012 6:51 am

webfork wrote:
SYSTEM wrote:I have removed "Intel or AMD processor" from the dependencies, because every single application in the database requires a processor. There is no point mentioning it in the dependencies field.
There are more x86 processor companies than just AMD an Intel.
Well, I doubt if UltraDefrag really won't work on a VIA processor.
UltraDefrag download page wrote: For 32-bit Windows on Intel and AMD Processors: ultradefrag-5.0.0-RC2.bin.i386.exe.

For 64-bit Windows on Intel and AMD Processors: ultradefrag-5.0.0-RC2.bin.amd64.exe.

For 64-bit Windows on Itanium Processors: ultradefrag-5.0.0-RC2.bin.ia64.exe.
I think they mention Intel and AMD only to make it clear that UltraDefrag doesn't work on processors with a different architecture (such as ARM or Tilera).
My YouTube channel | Release date of my 11th playlist: January 26, 2018

User avatar
Aeolis
Posts: 17
Joined: Sun Feb 21, 2010 8:58 am

Re: UltraDefrag

#25 Post by Aeolis » Sun Apr 08, 2012 11:42 am

Hello folks,

Does UltraDefrag support relative path in the log_file_path = "" switch? Like log_file_path = "..\Log", so it could store the logs inside a folder where the application .exe is.

Best regards,

Aeolis

User avatar
JohnTHaller
Posts: 600
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 4:44 pm
Location: New York, NY
Contact:

Re: UltraDefrag

#26 Post by JohnTHaller » Wed Jun 20, 2012 2:49 pm

Aeolis wrote:Does UltraDefrag support relative path in the log_file_path = "" switch? Like log_file_path = "..\Log", so it could store the logs inside a folder where the application .exe is.
It does. In the form .\\Logs\\MyLogFile.log or .\\..\\Logfile.log to place it in a subdirectory or up a directory respectively. We use this in UltraDefrag Portable to automatically place a log file in the app's Data directory.
PortableApps.com - The open standard for portable software | Support Net Neutrality

User avatar
webfork
Posts: 7515
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 8:06 pm
Location: US, Texas
Contact:

Re: UltraDefrag

#27 Post by webfork » Fri Feb 01, 2013 4:05 pm

UltraDefrag 6.0.0 RC1 is out

Ours: http://www.portablefreeware.com/index.php?id=2228
Theirs: http://ultradefrag.sourceforge.net/en/index.html

Some nice changes below (astersks added to the stuff that might interest users here):
All disk processing algorithms were optimized for speed and efficiency.*
Support to optimize FAT disks was added.*
The ability to specify the file sorting order and criteria was added for optimization.*
Additional filters for fragment and file size were added.*
Optimization now makes use of all specified filters.*
The ability to minimize the window to the system tray was added.
The ability to display the progress on the task bar icon was added for Windows 7® and above.
File fragmentation reports are now no longer stored in the root folder of the drive, but in a sub-folder of the installation folder, so they are no longer left behind after removing UltraDefrag.*
The Explorer context menu handler is now configurable too.
Supporting Net Neutrality - BattleForTheNet | Why this matters | More from EFF.org

User avatar
webfork
Posts: 7515
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 8:06 pm
Location: US, Texas
Contact:

Re: UltraDefrag

#28 Post by webfork » Tue Apr 02, 2013 4:31 pm

From the entry: "Alternatively, UltraDefrag Portable switches automatically between the 32-bit and 64-bit versions and cleans up the fragmentation details left behind on drives."

By "fragmentation details" does that mean the log file saved to the drive root or are there other items?
Supporting Net Neutrality - BattleForTheNet | Why this matters | More from EFF.org

copc
Posts: 18
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2012 7:45 pm

Re: UltraDefrag

#29 Post by copc » Wed Oct 22, 2014 6:48 am

"error 60, file for drive emulation must be in one contiguous disk area".
Ultradefrag-portable can not solve the error 60 problem.

TP109
Posts: 483
Joined: Sat Apr 08, 2006 7:12 pm
Location: Illinois/Indiana

Re: UltraDefrag

#30 Post by TP109 » Fri Nov 20, 2015 5:59 am

Ultradefrag 6.1.1 released. Minor bug fix.

Changelog:
http://ultradefrag.sourceforge.net/HISTORY.TXT

Post Reply