If one defrags when it is not needed, one only wastes one's time. WRT your statement using defrag as a first attempt to fix a problem, I agree, but only WRT Hard drive or format related failures, but defrag generally will not continue if it finds a dirty drive.
I defrag Vista exactly like I have always defragged any NT box- about once per month- and I have always noticed a significant improvement after completion, even though it is still set to defrag on the fly. MS has always claimed that defrag is not necessary on NT, but I have always claimed that they are wrong. It is not as necessary as often as with their DOS based OS's, but still a standard necessary maintenance point.
As a point of order, This Vista box is still set up stock so that I can continue to learn it's vagaries... I would normally have auto defrag disabled anyway. As a recovery specialist, I can tell you that the auto-defrag options are bad news if one should ever need to recover files. All automated routines relating to the hdd should be shut off if possible, running the maintenance utilities by hand.
Another thing, is the registry. I have never needed to get into it, because the OS maintains it. XP does not do that very well [...]
Vista is not a whole lot better at it either...
It has a 1.6 ghz dual core and it by far, outperforms my fast 3.4 Ghz desktop.
Mine is about the same, and is no where near as fast as my bigger XP based desktops, or at least not as fast as AMD 2600+ and up... It may be comparable to 2300 or so. No getting around it, Vista is a fat pig, and if I had my druthers, this thing would be running XP right now. But then I would never learn Vista...
I don't get all this constant whining. I really don't.
If you will recall, I was not particularly unhappy, just not very excited about Vista. It is certainly over-sized, slow, and isn't more functional than XP. It works, as I said, and I have not seen the overwhelming problems as related by some. I give it an ~eh~.
Something else I am using now for the first time in Vista is the audio interface. I have it set up to use verbal commands while I am some distance away. This all comes with vista premium home, and it very much improved over earlier versions. As you may know, they are putting the base program in cars by Ford now.
I have Skype so I am experimenting with all sorts of neat things that never really interested me before as far as hands free calling, and basic instructions for the OS. It's quite exciting to think about the possibilities of third party apps and I have so much more stuff to try. Just wish I had the time.
I think there is more to vista then just replacement OS that is bulky or fat. As to speed, other than initial boot-up, it is very fast. Assuming you have few choke points like lack of RAM or slow drives..
If I wanted to do the same old things I did before, I would have stayed with 98 second ed. It was perfect.
But vista opens up a different option set of possibilities, and yes it is a resource hog, but those services are there to do more than what XP is capable of. It will get even better in time as these ideas make their way into apps. Apps that Mac will never do unless it runs Vista. Slow booting is not a problem on a computer designed to run 24/7. It's what it is capable of doing that is interesting and that is not being explored by many users.
Just my thoughts. I think Microsoft has more imagination and future capabilities built into this OS for a reason, and that reason is being ignored, much as the first desktops were labeled as toys.