Re: FAT32 or NTSF
From: Tom (noway_at_nothere.com)
Date: 05/22/04
- Next message: Plato: "Re: getting Microsoft to communicate with me"
- Previous message: RJK: "Re: So you think your HD is kaputt ..."
- In reply to: Plato: "Re: FAT32 or NTSF"
- Next in thread: Plato: "Re: FAT32 or NTSF"
- Reply: Plato: "Re: FAT32 or NTSF"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Sat, 22 May 2004 18:19:03 -0400
"Plato" <|@|.|> wrote in message
news:40afc7b3$0$82189$45beb828@newscene.com...
> Bruce Chambers wrote:
> >
> > Personally, I wouldn't even consider using FAT32 when NTFS is an
> > option. FAT32 has no security capabilities, no compression
> > capabilities, no fault tolerance, and a lot of wasted hard drive space
> > on volumes larger than 8 Gb in size. But your computing needs may
> > vary, and there is no hard and fast answer.
> >
> Let's entertain a counter opinion:
>
> It's 9:00 PM and Mr. Customer calls and says his daughter has spent days
> working on a
> project for school in Word and his XP in NTFS has suddenly crashed. She
> needs the project printed out for tomorrow.
>
> What are your options to get the data back asap? Use a bootdisk? No, it
> wont see NTFS so you wont be able copy the .doc to it. What if there is
> no A: drive and you use a bootable win9x dos cd? OK, but you still wont
> see NTFS and besides, you cant burn in dos to copy the file even if you
> used a utility like:
>
> http://www.bootdisk.com/files3333/readntfs.zip
> http://www.bootdisk.com/txtfiles/readntfs.htm
>
> Wasted space? Does it really matter with the super large hard drives
> these days? Sure it matters with small Internet cache files but they can
> be cleaned on a regular basis. Besides, you can limit the size of the
> cache folder anyway.
>
> Hmm you think, lets spend over an hour doing an overlay XP install and
> cross our fingers and hope it works. Ever read the notice that My
> Documents will be overwrote? Yes one can overcome that niggle if you
> use a different name then you did originally and yes your XP key will
> still work.
>
> Now compare above to XP in FAT32 where any win98 bootdisk will see the
> .doc and be able to copy it to a floppy, or, if no floppy, boot with a
> win9x cd [you're actually in dos] and use your LPT zip drive or whatever
> to get the data off the hard drive.
>
> Of course, you did say [But your computing needs may vary, and there is
> no hard and fast answer.] In addition, one can of course make multiple
> partitions for the NTFS security features to protect certain files. But
> a proprietary compression routine? Not recommended whatsoever for any
> reason.
Keep in mind that Bruce will readily admit he has little experience with
FATxx formatted drives/partitions. I wonder why he gives the opinion. FATxx
still has good uses. But, as NTFS advances, those issues you list that FAT
can fix, will be remedied in NTFS sooner or later.
As an aside, I don't use FAT for anything, as I back up my data regularly.
But, I do wish that NTFS was as easily recoverable as FAT for files in case
something went awry.
- Next message: Plato: "Re: getting Microsoft to communicate with me"
- Previous message: RJK: "Re: So you think your HD is kaputt ..."
- In reply to: Plato: "Re: FAT32 or NTSF"
- Next in thread: Plato: "Re: FAT32 or NTSF"
- Reply: Plato: "Re: FAT32 or NTSF"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
