Re: FAT32 vs. NTFS

All Things Mopar <none_of_your@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in
news:Xns97C6A39345BE3ReplyScoreTag@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx:

Today attempted to dazzle everyone with this profound
linguistic utterance

why, exactly?


Security for one! FAT32 has no way of securing files
between one user and another, NTFS has file permissions and
EFS. Quotas & auditing for 2, you can't set quota limits or
audit file ownership on FAT32. Functionality for 3, NTFS
supports much larger disk sizes, also supports volume mount
points.

First, SP2 has no more security than did SP1 in this regard,
but it really doesn't matter in a single-use environment, that
used by the vast majority of XP users outside corporate IT
houses. Add to that the simple fact that "microsoft security"
is in the same class of oxymoron as "military intelligence" or
even the TLA "MAD", used during the Cold War, which was itself
a 3-word oxy - Mutually Assurred Distruction.



Read first. Not talking about SP. Talking about file systems. I'd contend
that a majority of non-corporate systems do indeed have multi users
(dad,mom, kids). Only NTFS allows you to secure folders by specific user.


I agree with R. McCarty, now a days, I see no reason to use
FAT32 on a single boot XP system. Only time I would use
FAT32 is between a dual boot OS where the other OS doesn't
support NTFS. Even then I'd use NTFS for the boot
partition, and FAT32 for a second data partition.

I use NTFS for my primary partitions and for one of my two
data partitions, primarily to get greater-than-4-gig file
sizes, not for performance, which is best described in my many
years of experience as "dismal".

But, as another said, YMMV. Cheers!


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Cloned XP Professional boot partition - and lost the login prompt
    ... NTFS, EFS and a comprehensive backup strategy on the system volume. ... FAT32 C drive, doesn't have dynamic volumes, and is not RAIDed. ... important than security. ... If you have to boot into DOS ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.setup_deployment)
  • Re: FAT32 vs. NTFS
    ... FAT32 has no way of securing files ... Functionality for 3, NTFS ... First, SP2 has no more security than did SP1 in this regard, ... and FAT32 for a second data partition. ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.general)
  • No Local Security Policy
    ... I am using FAT32. ... Is it a big deal converting to NTFS? ... >>Local Security Settings and select User Rights ...
    (microsoft.public.win2000.security)
  • Re: permissions on Win2k with Fat32 system partition
    ... NTFS is what creates folder security. ... Basically since you are using FAT32 there is absolutely no local security on ... > I have a Win2k machine whose system partition is formated in Fat32. ...
    (microsoft.public.win2000.security)
  • Re: XP Repairing System.
    ... neglecting the fact that the 'so called' security ... then run internet from non-admin account. ... can then utilises the security features and ADS of NTFS to secure itself ... policy settings not available for FAT32, ...
    (uk.comp.homebuilt)