Yeah I noticed that about file fragmentation.  Evidently when
you don't let XP format a HD and let the manufacturer's CD
format it, it doesn't care if it's larger than 32gb.  However
this was a blank NON OS drive, an add on, so maybe that's why.

If XP uses NTFS5, then why does that chart also mention "NTFS"
for XP?

Do you, or does anyone know what these areas on that chart
mean, http://www.ntfs.com/ntfs_vs_fat.htm starting under "File
System Features" and specifically...
"File Attributes" (being "standard" or "custom")
"Alternate Streams"
"Sparse Files"
"Reparse Points"
"Volume Mount Points"

The rest I understand.
Thanks Ben,
-Clint

God Bless
Clint Hamilton, Owner
http://OrpheusComputing.com )

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Ben Moore"

There have been several versions of the NTFS file system. I
believe the
major change came with the release of Win2000.  I know
encryption was
available with that release.   So NTFS 5 is the file system on
Win2000 and
WinXP. There were several versions of NTFS that were released
through the
many versions of service packs for WinNT.

I've never tried it but I've read that WinXP will not format a
drive in
FAT32 with a partition larger than 32 GB.  I just bought a
Vosonic X's drive
to store digital photo's on when I'm on the road and Vosonic
has a program
they offer that allows you to format partitions larger than 32
GB under
WinXP.  WinXP can use partitions in FAT32 greater than 32 GB;
it just can't
create them.  Apparently Win98 doesn't have this limitation.

The 4 GB file limitation applies to single files.  Mostly,
video files I
assume. That would apply to compressed archives too I believe.
I know my
backup software wants to break up files at 4 GB.  Again, I just
have reading
experience with this because I've been running NTFS since
Win2000 was
released.

The biggest difference other than the security features that
I've seen
between NTFS and FAT32 is in the rate of fragmentation and in
file system
errors.  FAT32 seems to need defragmenting much more often than
NTFS drives.
I also rarely get the file system errors  that require me to
run scan disk
that I got running FAT32.

Ben Moore

-----Original Message-----
OrpheusComputing.com

I'm doing some performance tests comparing FAT32 to NTFS using
XP Pro (which I'll post soon).  In trying to determine their
differences as far as features go, I came across this page;
http://www.ntfs.com/ntfs_vs_fat.htm .  I've never heard of
"NTFS5" and I see that according to this, XP can use or uses
both NTFS and NTFS5, is that correct?  What got me wondering
about this is the "encryption" area and it says "NO" under NTFS
but "YES" for NTFS5 and my XP Pro at least has encryption, so
it must be NTFS5?  I never saw any options anywhere to format
using NTFS5, only NTFS.  So, I'm a bit confused on that.

Does anyone know if XP Pro will "work" EXACTLY the same if the
file system is FAT32?  As in, will it still have all the same
features/still "work like XP" except for encryption?  In FAT32,
XP was able to see an add-on 80gb HD and it was NOT
partitioned, it saw it correctly and was able to use the ENTIRE
drive.  So, I'm not clear on what is meant by the "FAT32 HD
size limitation" of 32gb.  I'm also not clear on the 4gb file
size limitation of FAT32 since I was able to use a file
(folder) 4gb in size.  Does that mean a SINGLE file, as in a
compressed executable or zipped file that is over 4gb?
Thanks,
-Clint
============= PCWorks Mailing List =================
Don't see your post? Check our posting guidelines &
make sure you've followed proper posting procedures,
http://pcworkers.com/rules.htm
Contact list owner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Unsubscribing and other changes: http://pcworkers.com
=====================================================

Reply via email to