Re: Fdisk vs WinXP
- From: Bruce Chambers <bchambers@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2007 19:44:09 -0600
cquirke (MVP Windows shell/user) wrote:
That's arguable. They meet the purpose for which they were designed, do they not?
Firstly, XP's built-in partitioning tools are deficient,....
No, they do not. The OS feature set encompasses FAT32 volumes > 32G,
which the tools are incapable of creating.
But *that* limitation is by deliberate design, so the tool meets its given purpose.
More seriously, if you use the non-GUI Diskpart tool to create or
format such volumes, the process fails destructively:
- initiates the process
- continues for a long time (presumably, 32G)
- aborts with a "too large" error
- leaves the disk space broken (no Undo)
Again, this is irrelevant to the initial installation of the OS, and is by design. Remember, FAT32 is a *legacy* file system, of little use nowadays.
--
Bruce Chambers
Help us help you:
http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. -Benjamin Franklin
Many people would rather die than think; in fact, most do. -Bertrand Russell
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Fdisk vs WinXP
- From: cquirke (MVP Windows shell/user)
- Re: Fdisk vs WinXP
- References:
- Fdisk vs WinXP
- From: JethroUK©
- Re: Fdisk vs WinXP
- From: Bruce Chambers
- Re: Fdisk vs WinXP
- From: cquirke (MVP Windows shell/user)
- Re: Fdisk vs WinXP
- From: Bruce Chambers
- Re: Fdisk vs WinXP
- From: cquirke (MVP Windows shell/user)
- Fdisk vs WinXP
- Prev by Date: Re: Networking shares problem!!
- Next by Date: Re: shutdown issue
- Previous by thread: Re: Fdisk vs WinXP
- Next by thread: Re: Fdisk vs WinXP
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|