Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

Lock down!!

Jump to latest Follow Reply
  • We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Show only dev responses
Just for the record, I haven't defragged my HDD's from the moment I installed them in my systems (yes: plural :p). Modern PC's and HDD's are so fast these days that speed differences caused by fragmentation are hardly noticable anymore.

And as for the file fragmentation itself. With the advent of the 32 bit drivers in Windows, the file fragmentation is now on par with what OS/2 could deliver way back in 1990. Basically, if you don't run MSDOS programs in MSDOS command mode (you know: reboot to MSDOS) and you have sufficient free diskspace and you use FAT32, then file fragmentation will be neglegiable.

Jan Peter
 
What do you think of NTFS format, I looked a defrag report about a month after a new format and I had thousands of fragments, I was a little disapointed to be honest. I wonder if you have heard any comparisons with this format?
 
jpd said:
Just for the record, I haven't defragged my HDD's from the moment I installed them in my systems (yes: plural :p). Modern PC's and HDD's are so fast these days that speed differences caused by fragmentation are hardly noticable anymore.

And as for the file fragmentation itself. With the advent of the 32 bit drivers in Windows, the file fragmentation is now on par with what OS/2 could deliver way back in 1990. Basically, if you don't run MSDOS programs in MSDOS command mode (you know: reboot to MSDOS) and you have sufficient free diskspace and you use FAT32, then file fragmentation will be neglegiable.

Jan Peter
Click to expand...
I did try out HPFS on NT once. A number of years ago... I believe it was a very intelligent file system (NTFS became first choise for me on NT ever since anyway).
And what you imply on OS/2 sounds true. It felt very advanced, even if I only had personal experience from the two first versions (when IBM+Microsoft=true?).
Never was an expert in OS/2 thou, even if I had some experience with LAN Manager on that platform long before I saw a NT Server.

Anyway, I belive there is a lot of people, especially in a world wide perspective, that does not have that up-to-date hardware, so for an user with average needs and a 'typical' ageing system, those general rules of doing scandisk/defrag is still a good rule of thumb. Or so I believe.

I agree on the observation on the modern hardware making defrag a smaller issue, but I don't know if I recognise/understand the latter part on using DOS command mode or not having major importance on file fragmentation. Are you saying that file fragmentation is negligible for all "only-Windows" users since 32-bit introduction? That’s seems like a bold statement.
That’s nice, because people doing bold statements and knowing what they are talking about is a good learning source! ;)
 
MostlyHarmless said:
I did try out HPFS on NT once. A number of years ago... I believe it was a very intelligent file system (NTFS became first choise for me on NT ever since anyway).
And what you imply on OS/2 sounds true. It felt very advanced, even if I only had personal experience from the two first versions (when IBM+Microsoft=true?).
Never was an expert in OS/2 thou, even if I had some experience with LAN Manager on that platform long before I saw a NT Server.
Click to expand...
I ran OS/2 on my system from the moment it went all into IBM's hands, and away from the mess Microsoft had created. Version 2.0 was my first. Always exclusively used FAT as filing system, though. Used it for more than 7 years as my main platform, as it could run native 32 bits OS/2, ran DOS better than MS-DOS ever could, and did the same for Windows 3.0/3.1 ;) Still have Warp 4 sitting on my hard drive to date.

Frequently did simple tasks like formatting a floppy while downloading through a modem. Try that with Windows prior to Win2K.
Anyway, I belive there is a lot of people, especially in a world wide perspective, that does not have that up-to-date hardware, so for an user with average needs and a 'typical' ageing system, those general rules of doing scandisk/defrag is still a good rule of thumb. Or so I believe.
Click to expand...
Depends. I stopped defragging/scandisking when I went over to OS/2 on my 40 MHz 386 system 14 years ago. That one had a 210 MB Quantum hard drive. A very slow system by todays standards, but because OS/2 never let my files fragment even on a FAT system, there was no longer any need to defrag.
I agree on the observation on the modern hardware making defrag a smaller issue, but I don't know if I recognise/understand the latter part on using DOS command mode or not having major importance on file fragmentation. Are you saying that file fragmentation is negligible for all "only-Windows" users since 32-bit introduction?
Click to expand...
Yep, that's what I am saying. OS/2 was far more intelligent (an in a way still is) than Windows. OS/2 made sure the correct, advanced file handling was at the file system driver level. That's more or less true for Windows as well, but only if you go through the 32 bits API for file handling. Only native 32 bits Windows applications can do that. So, where OS/2 made sure that your DOS programs could make use of the more advanced functions without them even knowing about it, with Windows you cannot do that.

Use DOS programs, especially when rebooting into DOS mode, and gone are all the advanced auto defrag functions, and your HDD is a mess in no time.

Jan Peter
 
What was the original subject of this thread again. :D
 
Castellon said:
What was the original subject of this thread again. :D
Click to expand...
A disk with the F-word? :rolleyes: :p

Anyway, some in-depth information will probably be of use in the future. These forums could be a good source of knowledege!
 
There are better ones out there already for general knowledge stuff.
 
Jackcolt said:
something I can dl? It's worth a shot!
Click to expand...
Sorry, what Castellon refers to while "answering" me is (as I understands it) just sources of information on Internet. Like trouble shooting web sites, technical advice sites or support sites from vendors...
If you ask me, it goes without saying that there are lots and lots of different kinds of sources, some being specialised, but personally I think it is also a mildly good thing to have some maybe-problems-with-this-game-related information-or-discussion on The Game forum. It is not either case, black or white. What may not help the initial poster may help someone else later.
Some problems&solutions may be game specific anyway and more often than not you find them in the game specific sites and forums.
It seems reasonable to have some techical stuff here as some people start looking here when they think they got problems with the game.

Sorry to hear about your problems... If you have followed the previous advices in the thread, maybe you just should wait just a bit more and try the 1.06 version of Hoi!

Otherwise, I good general advise is to have tons of patience and try one thing at a time, or at least keep good track of the different steps taken.
 
Except problems defraging is not game related. ;)
 
Jackcolt said:
something I can dl? It's worth a shot!
Click to expand...
Have you tried the reformat you mentioned?
 
Castellon said:
Except problems defraging is not game related. ;)
Click to expand...
In general, people may have a problem with knowing what's related in advance...
Of course, many of us are wrong now and then, but the positive results seems to be worth it.
Anyway, to remove what isn't the problem is a good way to narrow down what is the problem.

In this specific case and with one of the suggestions (defrag), well, maybe one should remember that defrag is in your Sticky
"3. Run Scandisk and defrag (or equivalent applications) on the drive you are installing to. ". Yes I know there is a comment there on the Windows versions this apply to, but Jackcolt did have Win98, didn't he?
Not that it was I who brought defrag up in this thread in the first place.

And, no, I don't thinkg everyone reads the FAQs/sticky's, we may like it or not.


Well, now I am pretty much fed up with this discussion. I must admit I have some difficulty to even see the problem here.
 
No, sorry not yet.

As you mostlyharmless say, I might just have to wait for the edition, or my other computer to come....
It seems that the only way to truly see if I can't run this game due Hardware, is of course to format, so I'll try that later.... I don't think that the 1.6 will help, as I know the patches mainly fix bugs, and not incidents like this. Well either im going to play this game, either in ½-1 month(format) or in 7 months(the new computer) :(
 
Okay let me know how it goes.
 
Okay, I had not seen that one before.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back