UltraDefrag

SYSTEM · **Posted:** 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.

TP109 · **Posted:** 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.

webfork · **Posted:** 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.

webfork · **Posted:** 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.

TP109 · **Posted:** 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?

webfork · **Posted:** 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.

SYSTEM · **Posted:** 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.

webfork · **Posted:** 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.

SYSTEM · **Posted:** 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).

Aeolis · **Joined:** Sun Feb 21, 2010 8:58 am **Posts:** 7

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

JohnTHaller · **Posted:** 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.

webfork · **Posted:** 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):

Quote:

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.

webfork · **Posted:** 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?

UltraDefrag

Who is online