Does defragmenting in Windows.....

kill your datas? or crush your PC? I do defragment sometimes but I'm so scared each time I do it. So please tell me the answer. Because my external hard drive is being quite slower then usual nowadays, I think I have to defragment the ex hard drive. Or is there anyother solution??

Anything that accesses the hard drive can potentially cause corruption through data corruption or a mechanical malfunction within the drive, which is why you should always back up your data. That said, defragmentation is particularly drive-intensive, so there's a higher chance of a problem occuring than with simple read-writes, because you're doing a lot more drive accesses.

Defragmentation shouldn't change anything if it works correctly. There's always the possibility of bugs in the program, drive problems, or memory corruption, so, again, frequent back-ups are the only sure way to keep your data safe.

If your external hard drive contains a FAT file system, or some other type of older file system, it could very well be fragmented. If it's NTFS (Windows XP's default file system), ext3, ReiserFS, or another modern, journaled file system, it shouldn't be fragmented. The Windows defragmenter program should tell you whether or not the drive is fragmented. If it's not, the drive could be getting ready to go kaput.

>>2
my C: is NTFS and its the most fragmented out of the four drives that I have (d: NTFS G: FAT I:FAT). I hope my computer don't go kaput though.

That's nonsense, defragmentation is quite safe. Each operation it does is atomic so unless your drive had reached the end of its days and fucks up completely, you'll be fine.

Defragmentation is INCREDIBLY DANGEROUS YOU SHOULD NEVER DO IT.

Just kidding.  You should probably defragment your hard drive (if you run Windows) every few months.

As a correction to >>2, NTFS still needs to be defragmented every once in a while, just like FAT filesystems.  ReiserFS uses a dancing trees algorithm AFAIK, so it "defragments" as you add, relocate and remove files.

>>5
oh shit. I have to defragment mine every week or it can go bad... mind you, I demand a lot on my system >_>

If your data is very dynamic and gets too fragmented too often, you'll stress your drive less by defragmenting often.

>>7
Truth. What's worse: a few minutes of thrashing while it reorganises the data, or endless thrashing over hours and hours while the heads flick back and forth picking up the fragments? Of course, it's a case of balance - don't do it to excess.

All that said, one more hint: Get some good defragmentation software. That fully excludes any Symantec/Norton bullshit as well as Executive Software's Diskkeeper (the latter one being terribly inefficient). O&O Software's "O&O Defrag" works nice for me, fast, reliable and efficient. There are others around, just make sure you read some tests before getting them.

>>9
PerfectDisk is, technically, the finest defragmenter. OO has many defragment options, but its much more a server/database/corporate defragmenter than one geared towards home users.

It is faster than PD, however. So if you want scheduled defrags in 5 minutes, OO is the way to go. For in-depth nightly sessions, PD.

There aren't any other alternatives I know of, at least well-known ones that I'd trust with all the data on my harddrives.

You guys ever hear of a defragmenter that uses RAM as a buffer, instead of a disk? It'd be totally unsafe to use in anything but a a laptop or a machine running off a UPS, but I'd think it'd be a lot faster. Ever hear of anything like that?

>>11
IIRC most format programs won't run on a laptop which isn't plugged in for this very reason.