Fat32 & Ntfs?

[kurtsl0an]

Originally posted by clocker@18 October 2003 - 04:45
Okay, I'll bite....
Prove it.

dammit. gimme a min!

[kurtsl0an]

okay, first of all, realize that most friggin articles on "FAT32 vs. NTFS" r as old as the hills, since both files sytems r 2. fer some reason, most people didn't know about NTFS until Win2000 - but it has been around LONGER than FAT32. this is an excerpt from a NTFS vs. FAT32 article on a ZDNET forum:

Fat 32 is faster.

NTFS use encryption (or you can download encryption apps for FAT32)

If you are editing large files (over 4gb) you need NTFS.

FAT 32 and NTFS are both stable with XP.

You can try FAT32 and if you decide to convert to NTFS you won't have problems...if you start with NTFS you could corrupt your files by converting to FAT32...even with Partition Magic 8 (read the HELP .pdf files).

If you are dual booting with 98 then you need to use FAT32 if you want to share files.

If you want to do a large FAT 32 partitions you need to fdisk first and choose FAT32 ...then install XP and choose FAT 32. If you don't fdisk first (or use a 3rd party app)...XP will limit the partition to 32GB...(or is that 36gb?)

personally, I would suggest FAT32 since you can convert to NTFS if you want to.

If you go with NTFS make sure you download SP1 (but make a restore point first)...it has NTFS fixes.

(NTFS drastically slowed down my system...for others, it makes no difference at all and they prefer it)

[clocker]

Five minutes later....

Nada.


F*ck...snuck in right under my post.
Sneaky bastard.

Okay then... in the real world what difference might I expect to see if I switch back to FAT 32? How could I quantitatively measure the diff?

Why is there air?

[kurtsl0an]

NTFS does slow down system perfomance - that is a fact. it's because of the file security it has 2 offer - unlike FAT32. that's y i say NTFS at work, but FAT32 at home. do u really need 2 specify file security at home?

[kurtsl0an]

Originally posted by clocker@18 October 2003 - 04:56
Five minutes later....

Nada.

i posted b4 u clock!

[clocker]

How large a partition can FAT32 deal with?

[kurtsl0an]

Originally posted by clocker@18 October 2003 - 05:01
How large a partition can FAT32 deal with?

bout 2 TB's - that's what i mean by most articles bein old

this 1 says u need NTFS fer anything larger than 4GB's, but i have FAT32 on my single partititoned 160GB drive right now -

[abu_has_the_power]

Originally posted by kurtsl0an@18 October 2003 - 04:58
NTFS does slow down system perfomance - that is a fact. it's because of the file security it has 2 offer - unlike FAT32. that's y i say NTFS at work, but FAT32 at home. do u really need 2 specify file security at home?

well, does this kind of security protect u from riaa and shitheads like them?

[kurtsl0an]

Originally posted by abu_has_the_power+18 October 2003 - 05:06--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (abu_has_the_power @ 18 October 2003 - 05:06)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-kurtsl0an@18 October 2003 - 04:58
NTFS does slow down system perfomance - that is a fact.&nbsp; it&#39;s because of the file security it has 2 offer - unlike FAT32.&nbsp; that&#39;s y i say NTFS at work, but FAT32 at home.&nbsp; do u really need 2 specify file security at home?

well, does this kind of security protect u from riaa and shitheads like them? [/b][/quote]
i guess only if u enable it - which i guarantee no1 does&#33;

[Wolfmight]

NTFS is faster.. for big hardrives