Re: Disk drive damage continues even in Windows 2003
- From: "Gary Chanson" <gchanson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2005 22:10:48 -0400
"Norman Diamond" <ndiamond@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:OOG1UFhyFHA.664@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> > It's probably not a good idea to use NTFS when it's going to be
> > accessed by different operating systems. Different versions of WIndows
> > implement different versions of NTFS and they are not guaranteed to be
> > compatible as far as I know. For instance, XP will modify the volume
> > structures such that some Win2K vintage tools (like Partition Magic) will
> > no longer work properly. Just booting up XP on a Win2K system is enough
> > to polute NTFS volumens. FAT32 is the most universal file system.
>
> Ouch. I knew that Windows 2000 altered older NTFS volumes so that NT4 SP3
> could no longer use them. That isn't an issue in this case because I don't
> try to connect a USB hard drive to an NT4 system ^_^
>
> If Windows XP pollutes NTFS volumes that were created by Windows 2000, then
> even having a dual boot system with Windows 2000 on D: and XP on E: would
> result in even the internal drive's partitions being unusable the next time
> 2000 is booted, right? But I haven't had that experience.
The changes that XP makes to NTFS volumes doesn't seem to bother Win2K,
but the do create problems for some versions of some third-party tools.
> In a way FAT16 is most universal and FAT32 is second. But then I either
> have to divide the 250GB drive into around 120 partitions or around 8
> partitions, respectively. (Or I could look for a USB hard disk driver for
> Windows 98 and create one FAT32 partition, um, maybe.)
You would only need to go back to FAT16 for NT or early versions of Win95.
Win95-OSR2 introduced support for FAT32. I think there are drivers floating
around which add FAT32 support to NT.
> Either way, I wouldn't be able to make backups of some MSDN downloads.
You download files larger the 32 GB often?
--
- Gary Chanson (Windows SDK MVP)
- Abolish Public Schools
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Disk drive damage continues even in Windows 2003
- From: Norman Diamond
- Re: Disk drive damage continues even in Windows 2003
- References:
- Disk drive damage continues even in Windows 2003
- From: Norman Diamond
- Re: Disk drive damage continues even in Windows 2003
- From: Gary Chanson
- Re: Disk drive damage continues even in Windows 2003
- From: Norman Diamond
- Re: Disk drive damage continues even in Windows 2003
- From: Gary Chanson
- Re: Disk drive damage continues even in Windows 2003
- From: Norman Diamond
- Re: Disk drive damage continues even in Windows 2003
- From: Gary Chanson
- Re: Disk drive damage continues even in Windows 2003
- From: Norman Diamond
- Re: Disk drive damage continues even in Windows 2003
- From: Gary Chanson
- Re: Disk drive damage continues even in Windows 2003
- From: Norman Diamond
- Disk drive damage continues even in Windows 2003
- Prev by Date: Re: Disk drive damage continues even in Windows 2003
- Next by Date: Re: Dialog boxes and & sign
- Previous by thread: Re: Disk drive damage continues even in Windows 2003
- Next by thread: Re: Disk drive damage continues even in Windows 2003
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|