To what sort of "compatibility" do you gain from Fat32? The brain not adjusting correctly to better? I think that's a lot of peoples problems with updates, it's okay.
theres no reason to stay with fat32 unless you have xp and an old windows like 98 and before dual booting. and even then it would be better to have a fat32 partition AND an ntfs partition. if youre going to have to convert a bunch of files from fat 32 to ntfs then thats a different story. just start clean and with ntfs.
Originally Posted by Ben~ I might switch to NTFS next time I do a Windows re-install... But I do like being able to send files to my Windows partition easily.
Can you get it to use more than 32gb with fat? If not then that's the main reason I'd switch.
IIRC the limit is somewhere between 32 and 48gb. I'm sitting pretty since my XP partition is only 28gb, using only 12gb of it.
Originally Posted by -Adam- No need to get offensive, Brandon
How does asking what the point of staying with Fat32 was, any sort of sign that I was being offensive. I see no reason not to believe that this is your way of just trying to start another argument, seeing as the last few haven't exactly worked out in your favor, even though you still seem to feel that leaving with a smile on your face, changes that. So with that said, I've said what I wanted to say, and if anyone finds it offensive in any way, I don't apologize.
I can see my welcome here slowly fading away for whatever reason, so don't mind me if my attitude towards people who continue feeding me that feeling, isn't exactly positive. By no means do I intend to start arguments, just share my two cents, even if it's not generally accepted.
Originally Posted by BrandonC To what sort of "compatibility" do you gain from Fat32?
I'll have a pop now my shows finished;
What "compatibility" do I gain? How about write "compatibility" with other OS's?
The brain not adjusting correctly to better? I think that's a lot of peoples problems with updates, it's okay.
This is the OTT bit, just so you don't go away thinking you're right in this. Just like I won't update to Vista because there are performance cuts in my games, what you think is "better" isn't.
Originally Posted by BrandonC To what sort of "compatibility" do you gain from Fat32?
I'll have a pop now my shows finished;
What "compatibility" do I gain? How about write "compatibility" with other OS's?
The brain not adjusting correctly to better? I think that's a lot of peoples problems with updates, it's okay.
This is the OTT bit, just so you don't go away thinking you're right in this. Just like I won't update to Vista because there are performance cuts in my games, what you think is "better" isn't.
Write incompatibility for other OS's? You would write an entire hard drive to fat32 just so you can potentially install other OS's in the future? Sounds silly, especially since a hard drive can have multiple partitions with both Fat32 and NTFS.
The FAT file system is relatively uncomplicated, and is supported by virtually all existing operating systems for personal computers. This ubiquity makes it an ideal format for floppy disks and solid-state memory cards, and a convenient way of sharing data between disparate operating systems installed on the same computer (a dual boot environment).
The most common implementations have a serious drawback in that when files are deleted and new files written to the media, directory fragments tend to become scattered over the entire disk, making reading and writing a slow process. Defragmentation is one solution to this, but is often a lengthy process in itself and has to be performed regularly to keep the FAT file system clean. Defragmentation should not be performed on solid-state memory cards since they wear down eventually
aka fat32 sucks. i cant even believe somebody out there still uses it. welcome to the dos days.
Brandon: We are using Fat32 because OS X can read and write to it whereas it can only read NTFS. Not because we want to install other OS' in the future.
Advertisement
Post Reply
