Running XP, not concerned about compatability with other OSs.
Added a new External (firewire) HD to store/play my media library.
Any recommendation on fat32 or ntfs?
thanks.
Running XP, not concerned about compatability with other OSs.
Added a new External (firewire) HD to store/play my media library.
Any recommendation on fat32 or ntfs?
thanks.
ntfs
If you plan on storing files that are larger than 4GB then go with NTFS. FAT32 is compatible with more OS's such as Windows 98, XP, Vista, the Xbox 360, and the PS3. NTFS is basically only compatible with Windows 2000, XP, and Vista.
For pure music purposes FAT32 wouldn't be bad but you should use NTFS if you plan on storing videos.
I use FAT32, for compatibility, but since that's not an issue with you go with NTFS.
NTFS works well under Linux with NTFS-3G, just for the record. It supports full read and write, but I'm not sure if journaling is there yet.
Anyways, if compatibility isn't an issue, always go with NTFS. There is no reason for FAT32 other than compatibility.
ext2ifs = http://www.fs-driver.org (http://www.fs-driver.org)
later
Running XP, not concerned about compatability with other OSs.
NTFS all the way, no question.
Maybe you will be concerned about compatibility with another computer in the future, since it's an external disk? I could say the only need for NTFS is when you're gonna have files larger than 4 GB. I don't see it happening in music storage, even when having Audio DVD.
Yeah, the only need other than vastly increased speed, stability, and security, sure.
NTFS, even Linux supports it now through a program, so compatibility issues are no longer a problem now or in the future. After all, Microsoft will soon implement WinFS, so NTFS is not going to change.
NTFS for sure
ext2ifs = http://www.fs-driver.org (http://www.fs-driver.org)
I have read somewhere about the insecurity of the FAT32 file system to errors, from power failure and the like. In contrast then, heard the superiority of NTFS. I haven't enough technical knowledge to look for credible sources that can specify to me.
EXT2, how resilient is that against unexpected errors. Any advice?
Running XP, not concerned about compatability with other OSs.
NTFS. Do not pass Go. Do not collect $200.
If you need direct compatability with other major OSes, FUSE+NTFS-3g is a very good solution, including MacOS. Even still, you may just be able to share the files from your current system.
It depends on how many machines you will be connecting the drive to. I've had some very bad experiences with the use of NTFS on external drives - Windows seems to be quite happy to corrupt the file system if the USB ports/cables/controller aren't all of the very highest quality. In particular, transferring files directly between external disks is likely to hose the target drive's filesystem.
FAT32 is out if you need huge partitions or large files; for most other uses it's not bad (if you're paranoid about data security you can always create a set of PARs for each folder). And if you have a PS3, it's the ideal choice for transferring media from your PC.
Other options may exist, like that ext2 driver - but you'd have to bring along the driver if you wanted to connect the disk to a standard Windows PC, so it's probably not as convenient.
In contrast then, heard the superiority of NTFS. I haven't enough technical knowledge to look for credible sources that can specify to me.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NTFS (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NTFS)
http://www.ntfs.com/ (http://www.ntfs.com/)
http://technet2.microsoft.com/windowsserve...3.mspx?mfr=true (http://technet2.microsoft.com/windowsserver/en/library/81cc8a8a-bd32-4786-a849-03245d68d8e41033.mspx?mfr=true)
THEY SAY that huge cluster sizes will make reading-writting fast. Up to 32GB, a FAT32 filesystem can produce automatically 32k clustersize, against default-4k in NTFS filesystems.
I personally did not EVER notice any improvements of 64k/FAT32 clusters on NTFS/4k. There is an option to make NTFS with larger clusters but I don't think that would bring any improvement as well.
I'd say you should stick with NTFS because it support larger drives (FAT32 can support partitions up to 32GB only). That's the pretty much default for these days.
I'd say you should stick with NTFS because it support larger drives (FAT32 can support partitions up to 32GB only). That's the pretty much default for these days.
Don't speak nonsense. Even on retail Win98 without updates you can have 127 GB partitions. Properly patched Win98 can work with 1 TB, WinNT5 can also mount 1 or 2 TB partitions.
The 32 Gig limit was put in WinNT5 disk formatting routine to make FAT32 look worse than it is.
Yeah, where are you getting that info from Bourne?
I think the general census (which means everyone) would recommend NTFS.
JXL
Doesn't FAT32 have a 4GB file size limit? Granted, if all you are storing is music, that is not a big deal.
The 32 Gig limit was put in WinNT5 disk formatting routine to make FAT32 look worse than it is.
Bingo. Inorder to format some drives, I had to use the commandline.
Recommend NTFS. Support for over 4GB files is a necessity.
I would have thought if a file system was to get corrupted it would be FAT32 with the higher chance since NTFS is journal-ed.
I had big issues with a Maxtor external drive and NTFS. It was a known issue and there were workarounds, but I still lost some data. Now I just use ext3 for storage so I don't need to worry about anything. I have a drive with HFS+, NTFS and FAT partitions for transferring stuff to other OSes but I don't need it very often.
I ain't talking non-sense... I am saying what users will face when trying to format 100GB drive with FAT32. There is a workaround but I'm not sure how you will end up with the clusters or if that would compromise the whole performance. I'm sure there are "limitations" and "workarounds" and people will eventually avoid workarounds.
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/314463/EN-US (http://support.microsoft.com/kb/314463/EN-US)
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/314463/EN-US (http://support.microsoft.com/kb/314463/EN-US)
Thanks for the link. MS states, "The maximum (FAT32) disk size is approximately 8 terabytes . . . "
(FAT32 can support partitions up to 32GB only).
Maybe you should read it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NTFS (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NTFS)
http://www.ntfs.com/ (http://www.ntfs.com/)
http://technet2.microsoft.com/windowsserve...3.mspx?mfr=true (http://technet2.microsoft.com/windowsserver/en/library/81cc8a8a-bd32-4786-a849-03245d68d8e41033.mspx?mfr=true)
Thansk for the links, however, as I read really really slow, the only highlights I got out of it is that journaling seems to be really really good, NTFS supports while EXT2 doesn't support it. EXT3, the successor does. However, can that EXT2 work around work with EXT3 partitions?
Thansk for the links, however, as I read really really slow, the only highlights I got out of it is that journaling seems to be really really good, NTFS supports while EXT2 doesn't support it. EXT3, the successor does. However, can that EXT2 work around work with EXT3 partitions?
Anything that can mount EXT2 can mount EXT3. The only difference is that the journaling feature will not be used.
>The maximum (FAT32) disk size is approximately 8 terabytes . . .
And with such large cluster sizes, if you install Windows it will take up 8 terrabytes
ext2ifs = http://www.fs-driver.org (http://www.fs-driver.org)
later
This would have been really great to use with windows, but it does not seem to be compatible with TrueCrypt (http://www.truecrypt.org/). Ever time I would try to create a new encrypted folder or drive the computer would crash. Uninstall ext2ifs, and it works fine.
If you plan to plug your external HD on some dvd player with usb, don't forget that they can only read FAT32, not NTFS.
When i had a fat32 partion i had lots of lost clusters, broken files the rsult of r windows crashes and other fine window problems. Then i converted to ntfs and i never had a lost cluster since (5 years agoo).
Choose ntfs if you have the choice.
Thanks to Spoon and Soultrain for backing me up.
No user should push the hardcore boundaries with FAT32. There is a reason it has those limitations.
When i had a fat32 partion i had lots of lost clusters, broken files the rsult of r windows crashes and other fine window problems. Then i converted to ntfs and i never had a lost cluster since (5 years agoo).
Choose ntfs if you have the choice.
Another good reason, indeed. Same experience here since switching to NTFS after I upgraded to XP from ME a while back.
In any case, Windows won't FAT32 format any drive larger than 32GB, so if the OP's drive didn't ship with FAT32 in the first place (and it's more than likely >32GB), this is a moot question.
When i had a fat32 partion i had lots of lost clusters, broken files the rsult of r windows crashes and other fine window problems. Then i converted to ntfs and i never had a lost cluster since (5 years agoo).
Choose ntfs if you have the choice.
Another good reason, indeed. Same experience here since switching to NTFS after I upgraded to XP from ME a while back.
In any case, Windows won't FAT32 format any drive larger than 32GB, so if the OP's drive didn't ship with FAT32 in the first place (and it's more than likely >32GB), this is a moot question.
It's entirely possible to format FAT32 drives larger than 32GB using either third party tools or even using Windows' command line tools. I had a 200GB drive that was
only usable when formatted as FAT32; being used as NTFS it kept losing data.
It's entirely possible to format FAT32 drives larger than 32GB using either third party tools or even using Windows' command line tools. I had a 200GB drive that was only usable when formatted as FAT32; being used as NTFS it kept losing data.
We already covered this.
Can we get a list of
recommended free Windows tools that will format drives larger than 32GB with FAT32?
We already covered this.
Can we get a list of recommended free Windows tools that will format drives larger than 32GB with FAT32?
I have used SwissKnife (http://www.compuapps.com/download/Swissknife/swissknife.htm) (currently v3.22, and free!) very successfully recently - on two 2.5" drives in USB caddies!
Not for Windows as such, but I use gparted for everything partition related - the live CD is fine for creating, resizing partitions etc. in a variety of formats. Probably a bit overkill just for creating a FAT32 partition, but it works well and since you can boot from it, it makes changing system partitions a lot easier (although still not recommended for the careless!)
There is also a built in command in Windows that will format above 32GB of FAT32, but I've no idea what it is any more.
Can we get a list of recommended free Windows tools that will format drives larger than 32GB with FAT32?
h2format (http://www.heise.de/software/download/h2format/40825) from German tech magazine c't.
I have used it several times to format external USB drives and can recommend it.
It's a command line tool for Windows. Unfortunately the included docs are written in German. Here are the most important hints from the docs:
1) using the Windows management console create an
unformatted partition and assign a drive letter to it, for instance X:
2) open a command line window (cmd.exe) and type
h2format X: (replace X: with your real drive letter from step 1)
2a)
advanced usage: the optional parameter "sectors per cluster" may be given (values 1, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64).
warning! using too small cluster sizes will result in a great number of clusters on the disk, increasing the size of the FAT and potentially causing problems (e.g. Scandisk on Windows XP not working; Mac OS X crashing).
For those people who prefer GUI programs there is a tool called Fat32Formatter (http://tokiwa.qee.jp/EN/Fat32Formatter/index.html). (I have never used it and can't tell you if it works as specified...)
mkfs FTW