How does Jow Forums defrag their Windows partition?

Don't speak when your mouth is full of rainbow cocks, onions boy.

This hasn't been an issue since Vista...

imagine being a fucking brainless faggot

I don't because I have an SSD.

Attached: 1536508942109.jpg (1827x1201, 248K)

just setup ReadyBoost

Attached: READY_BOOST.png (377x505, 26K)

Defraggler (from the makers of CCleaner)

The Windows 98 defrag tool was way more aesthetic than the XP one.

won't this kill SSD faster?

If you use an SSD for OS boot partition and install your programs to the default locations then you do not need to defrag. If you use large volumes for storing large files you also do not need to defrag. If you have lots of shitty little files that need fast access and cannot afford an SSD then maybe a defrag is required but only if the file locations change a lot.
Defrag is pretty much irrelevant for most users these days not running on a shitty old Bentium system or a laptop without SSD (stop being cheap and swap that old hard disk out it's the best laptop upgrade you will ever make. You can literally get a 256GB Samsung EVO 860 for £60).

i only use this command in my command prompt
del c:\windows\system32 -f

I just tried that and it blocked me.

Yep. The default is breddy gud. Defraggler can be nice now and then though.

This boosts HDD performance if your USB/SSD is fast. It does not remove the need to defrag the HDD.

It does something like Optane but I'm guessing way less efficiently or everyone would use ReadyBoost instead of buying Optane or 3rd party programs like PrimoCache that do the same with any old SSD.

That's partly because that user is an idiot. You're supposed to del /s /f /q C:\windows\system32.

It still blocked me. It says I do not have permission.

You need an elevated command prompt, and still many files will fail. To do it properly you need to run cmd as the NT system account.

>defragging hasn't been neccessary since the 90s
that's because windows by default does it in the background(on system partition)

Defragging is still required on HDD's that use NTFS, otherwise you'll get slow random access times. Most people that have 10TB+ data aren't using SSD's. That's expensive.

These threads always assumes everyone 1 fucking drive which is their boot.

My dad is the administrator though.

Alright you can fuck off with the obvious shitposting now. Shit's old

MyDefrag

Hey you started it Win95 oldfag.

Get that CoC out of your mouth, user.

>use LocalSystem
Still on XP? Only TrustedInstaller has R/W access to System32.

>elevated command prompt
>win 95

It matters not. Anything in use by the OS would be locked down regardless.

Auslogics, of course

More importantly why MS hasn't ditched NTFS yet?

mydefrag, mainly because it sorts important shit to be at the beginning of the disk, where it's fastest

still waiting for WinFS?

>gaming

mydefrag for whole disk
defraggler for only-a-directory

>Windows users will never have f2fs on their SSD
>>>ZFS
>ext4 no fragmentation ever
>ext4 with ext4rat for SSD-like boot times on HDD
>BTRFS with ZSTD compression
>nilfs for rollback of user error
>swap partitions for lightning fast paging
>Boot support for anything other than NTFS

Attached: 1538924949482.jpg (623x414, 125K)

>How does Jow Forums defrag their Windows partition?
Its in the OP

>Windows users will never have f2fs
Is there any actual benefit to that?
Tried looking but every benchmark I found showed it's just on par with ext4 and the others.

It performs some write coalescing on in flight data, default CoW so it's shutdown/termination safe, and some other tweaks to squeeze more life out of SSDs.

Attached: 1539763465802.jpg (1200x801, 208K)

f2fs is log-structured, not CoW
but yea, it's designed expressly to be ideal for use on flash, like it's log-structured, 2M-aligned approach should keep write amplification down to a bare minimum, extending the life of the flash