When I was younger, my friends and I joked about making a <i>"Disk Fragmenter"</i> which would enumerate through every file on the disk and split them into non-contiguous clusters to make sure that the actuator arm on your platter-drive gets a PROPER WORKOUT TO FEEL THE BURN.
Perhaps it's appropriate for me to link to the free game I made where you play a taxi driving through Disk Defragmenter and delivering stray blocks of data to their final locations: <a href="https://safetystoatstudios.itch.io/ddr" rel="nofollow">https://safetystoatstudios.itch.io/ddr</a>. It was pretty fun to watch Defragmenter as a kid, but it would have been better if it was interactive, kind of like the 3D maze screensaver.
I recall there being some techno-mysticism surrounding defragging regarding how often and when it was necessary, what it did and didn’t help, etc. I also remember the claim “Macs don’t need defragging” but I don’t know if HFS(+) was actually any less prone to fragmentation than FAT32 was. Companies like Symantec were happy to sell defragging tools to Mac users regardless.
People used to say the same about Linux ext4, it didn't need defragmenting.<p>afaics all that meant was file allocations make a little extra space at the end, so if the file expands it doesn't need to allocate a new block.<p>If one keeps files around for a long time and constantly adds to them, then the files get fragmented on any filesystem.<p>The only way to avoid this is pre-allocate all files to their maximum possible size and never exceed that size.
There's something satisfying about defragging that has been lost to time. Like oiling a squeaky engine
That and many desktop PCs making a kind of grinding noise from the floppy drive on start up, along with the bios "BEEP", as the default boot order option was to seek booting from A: (and possibly B:) floppy drives before the hard drive.
I agree. It may sound elitist but back then you need to understand a few concepts to use a computer. From simple things like a filesystem (folders, file, different file types, things my 19 years old nephew don't know), to how to install software, how to download software (!) and then things even a bit more technical: an operative system, how it works, booting, drivers, etc.<p>Now everything is just easier (which is better for most people!) but I miss the old days.
I've said the same thing about using Linux.<p>20 years ago if somebody told you they used Linux it really meant something - they weren't running WSL, they weren't running a VM in EC2, they probably didn't power on and immediately have things working, and they probably learned a ton just getting to a login screen for the first time. Spinning up a VM just doesn't give the same learning experience.
Degaussing too.
I love this. I wanted the disk noise, and I got it. I will say that’s a lot faster than my drives were in the late 1990s though.
The speed is determined by a simple 1000 / <iops> per disk (there's different disks if you click "Settings").<p>If you inspect and go to sources and look for "1e3 /" you'll find the line responsible, you can set a breakpoint and change e.disk.iops to 1000 which will make the timeout per row 1s instead of 2-4s, so the whole thing goes faster.
I love it. A couple notes:
- This is about 10x a real defrag speed - WAAAY too fast
- IIRC the "Data that will not be moved" was typically lumped at the beginning of the drive, not spread out all over.
I'm a stickler for accuracy too. The defragged blocks in the original Win9x program weren't solid blue - they had a hatch pattern texture to them. I remember it way too vividly.<p><i>Source: Watching a disk defrag was every millenial kids equivalent of going to the laundromat and watching laundry tumble.</i><p><a href="https://youtu.be/dc_SDyLYq3U?t=347" rel="nofollow">https://youtu.be/dc_SDyLYq3U?t=347</a>
I am guessing the developer took into account the fact that the younger generations these days don't have the patience for real time defragging.
author commenting on such things:<p><a href="https://morello.dev/blog/defrag98-rebuild" rel="nofollow">https://morello.dev/blog/defrag98-rebuild</a><p>what it looked like before<p><a href="https://morello.dev/blog/windows-98-defrag-simulator" rel="nofollow">https://morello.dev/blog/windows-98-defrag-simulator</a><p>a previous discussion:<p><a href="https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40962195">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40962195</a><p>here is another version i found when googling these things that seems somewhat similar, but with a few more "accurate" features. also, has the source available in a single file.<p><a href="https://horatioconkerhead.github.io/win98-defrag/" rel="nofollow">https://horatioconkerhead.github.io/win98-defrag/</a><p>if you want the real deal, you can run windows 95 in the browser quick. it took running it a few times to get it to actually defrag:<p><a href="https://archive.org/details/win95_in_dosbox" rel="nofollow">https://archive.org/details/win95_in_dosbox</a>
It could be spread out too
I love this. However, Amiga’s Reorg program had a vastly better display, with a larger, resizable window and individual pixels instead of large boxes. You could see much more of the disk at once and get a feel for what the entire operation was doing. Large holes would appear in the middle of a hunk of data, then large files would get moved into the hole, leaving new holes where their incontiguous blocks use to be. Defrag was nice. Reorg was captivating. I miss it.
Will need to degauss after this
My computer's <i>definitely</i> gonna be faster after this.
I started the defrag on F and got about 1/4 the way, but had to stop cause my brother wanted to use the family computer.<p>When I changed it between drives and back I lost my progress :/
I used to watch defrag (and defraggler). If you have OCD they are very satisfying to watch. The more fragmented they were to start with, the better.
Love the warning for using on a mobile device.
In the same vein, but showing live the go allocator and GC operating on the heap of a running program: <a href="https://github.com/MichaelMure/gogc98" rel="nofollow">https://github.com/MichaelMure/gogc98</a>
It feels a little too defragmented to start.<p>Typically it would be getting some bits from other parts of the drive and there would be a few (that many) bits it wouldn't move because they were the swap file and DOS boot system files.
Need this but for AI models. Sleep mode where they self prune and optimize overnight for their daily purpose.
There is even a click noise when you idly tap the screen.<p>As great as it is, way too fast.
4 Drives, 5.5G total. Luxury!<p>Per-drive individual sounds, and BSoD included. Nice touches, love it!
The sound killed me... :D
Defragmenting XFS is much less dramatic.
I need to set up a Windows 95 computer with a hard drive and stream the defragging online, complete with live audio.
What were the major filesystem technology improvements that made this redundant?
I think NTFS and SSD disks.
FAT32 allocates the first free block. IIRC, file order must match disk order because reasons. Ext2 prioritized allocating the middle of free space to allow fragment-free growth on both sides and it became a standard filesystem feature after that.
Legend
Brilliant. Whirring disk noise is nice touch.<p>If AI generated this is what the AI revolution is all about.<p>Can we get a cross platform screensaver?
This scratched an itch for me.<p>I’m going to watch Johnny Castaway now.
bill gates, I want my time back!
My YouTube
Hot