Re: NTFS vs FAT32 for Specific Application
From: Steve N. (Steve_N_at_nunya.biz.nes)
Date: 01/25/05
- Next message: Sleepless in Seattle: "Re: Internet connection and network"
- Previous message: Linda B: "Re: Pirated XP, means-test everyone and every product with "income"
- In reply to: LinusF: "NTFS vs FAT32 for Specific Application"
- Next in thread: Yves Leclerc: "Re: NTFS vs FAT32 for Specific Application"
- Reply: Yves Leclerc: "Re: NTFS vs FAT32 for Specific Application"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 12:18:19 -0800
LinusF wrote:
> I have an external 250GB hard drive which will be used almost solely to hold
> images. PSD, TIF, JPG, GIF in that order of frequency. Sizes will range
> from 2GB (a very few), 8-15 MB maybe 10%, 3-6 MB (maybe 40%), 1-3 MB (maybe
> 30%), smaller (all the rest.
> An unknown percentage of the HD will temporarily hold backups from the fixed
> drives.
> Question: which system should provide more space/speed/whatever? I use
> WinXP Pro on both machines this HD will attach to.
> Thanks
Use NTFS, it is much more robust in general and more efficient for large
drives than FAT32 is. There's no reason to use FAT32 unless you need to
access the drive from Win98/ME.
Steve
- Next message: Sleepless in Seattle: "Re: Internet connection and network"
- Previous message: Linda B: "Re: Pirated XP, means-test everyone and every product with "income"
- In reply to: LinusF: "NTFS vs FAT32 for Specific Application"
- Next in thread: Yves Leclerc: "Re: NTFS vs FAT32 for Specific Application"
- Reply: Yves Leclerc: "Re: NTFS vs FAT32 for Specific Application"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
|