DOS 7.1 FAT-32 Vs X-FAT

[Z15CAM]

Is X-FAT comparable with MS Win7 GUI and can you use bigger then 32GB Fat 32 Partitions primarily for BackUp Images from a DOS Boot?

In other words, does X-FAT over ride the DOS 32-Bit 32GB barrier and will Win7 GUI or Win 7 CMD recognize it?

In my opinion, in regards to Dos versions: Nothing has changed from the DOS 6 Win98 Boot Disc or do I succeed to EUFI BIOS Boots with MS crap behind it.

Looking for more then a 32 GB Fat partition!

 

[Elixer]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ExFAT

That pretty much tells you all you need to know.

 

[Z15CAM]

Huh - Glad you pointed that out - For a DOS beginner.

I'm just thinking my next step is to use X-FAT to brake the 32 GB barrier but does it and how does it effect Win's CMD in FAT Partitions.

Can I Boot X-Fat with a Terabyte of Volume where Fat32 Apps work?

Anyone tried it or have a better solution other then DOS 6 to what I'm thinking about or is it feasible?

 

[dave_the_nerd]

exFAT has nothing to do with DOS.

Anyway, FAT32 can go at least up to 120GB.

 

[Z15CAM]

Is X-FAT Bootable to dump GHOST Images?

You're wrong Fat 32 under DOS 6 to 7.1 will NOT not recognize more then a 32 Gb a FAT-32 partition while under a DOS Boot.

A DOS 6 Boot may recognize more then 32 GB's and boot but you will never navigate beyond 32 GB's of it's RAM Image.

Basically I want a DOS Boot into RAM that contains more then 32 GB's reading on Storage peripherals that are formated FAT.

 

[Elixer]

Huh - Glad you pointed that out - For a DOS beginner.

I'm just thinking my next step is to use X-FAT to brake the 32 GB barrier but does it and how does it effect Win's CMD in FAT Partitions.

Can I Boot X-Fat with a Terabyte of Volume where Fat32 Apps work?

Anyone tried it or have a better solution other then DOS 6 to what I'm thinking about or is it feasible?

I thought that table was pretty self explanatory... you would see that DOS isn't in the list of 'supported operating systems', but win XP and higher can handle it.

Why in the world are you still using DOS anyway, just what are you trying to do ?

 

[Z15CAM]

MS GUI will never over come DOS - PERIOD - I prepare Media and Dump Win OS Platforms using Ram loaded DOS Images through GHOST.

It's all so simple to Migrate Systems including Linux or BSD.

I just want a bigger volumes then spanning FAT-32 32GB volumes to work with.

If I can boot an Optical or USB Flash Drive onto your Hardware and I own it, load my system through DOS - I can do it using a FLOPPY if need be and a backup Fat-32 formatted HDD. Doesn't mean I can't prepare media using DiskPart.

Don't underestimate the power of DOS. About the only protection you have is a Password when entering BIOS and all I have to do is I clear CMOS.

 

[Elixer]

While GHOST was indeed handy, the limitations are far more than just the filesystem.
This is why people have moved on to better products that can deal with larger HDs.

There isn't really anything you can do to "fix" this, without using a OS that knows about newer file systems. You are stuck with the limitations of DOS, and GHOST.

 

[Z15CAM]

Elixer: Good Argument:

limitations of DOS, and GHOST.

Perhaps you're right and I'm stuck with spanning 32GB Fat-32 volumes but it doesn't limit the terabytes of image over-writing with GHOST after preparing Media with Diskpart.

GHOST is not 32GB limited - Perhaps in a Fat 32 32GB environment - I do not know.

Perhaps DOS X-FAT is limited to 32GB Volumes - I don't KNOW and hence the reason for this thread, I wonder if anyone has experienced X-FAT, which may over come that limit.

Read about X-FAT - It says it can break that Limit and all I want is feed back from those that have used it.

Apparently it is DOS and Loads Bootable into RAM seeing FAT beyond 32 GB's?

 

[Z15CAM]

OOP's - To much editing to define my Topic.

PS: Diskpart is an EFI Hdd, Optic or USB Boot into Ram - What about platforms that don't support EFI?

WTF - I know where I'm going and you had better catch up in regards MS DOS attack's - It's so very simple.

DOS RULES.

 

[dave_the_nerd]

This is asinine.

Linux and dd work fine for cloning Windows/NTFS/Fat32 partitions and drives, and manipulating/aligning partitions. Why are you using 20 year old software and complaining about 20 year old limitations?

 

[Z15CAM]

Why are you using 20 year old software and complaining about 20 year old limitations?

Because it still works providing you limit a multiple 32GB Fat 32 Storage Backup Partitions and it's SOLID even for Diskpart prepared SSD's. Considering one will never need more then a single FAT 32GB partition with compressed GHO images to over right the OS on the fly.

All I'm proposing is can we break that DOS FAT 32GB volume without having to span it.

Basically you don't want me to boot a 16GB USB Thumb, Optic or a Floppy into RAM where DOS is in Command.

Scary isn't it where Window's has no say. 40 year old Tech go $%^* yourself!

 

[thecoolnessrune]

Cool your jets dude. Your nearly cultish attitude over an instant Backup program isn't going to get you any help. People are telling you that given what you have told us, your request is fulfilled by better alternatives. Your request is illogical, your attitude is illogical, and your statements are illogical, and several are just outright false (no one ever needs more than a single 32GB partition for a GHO image, that's hilarious).

NTFS4DOS Professional is Abandonware now. Look for it and it should give you what you need.

 

[lamedude]

No clue how Ghost works, but FAT32 supports 2TB. XP and later's formatting tool is limited to 32GB so you might need to use þe olde fdisk/format. Not sure if there any limits in DOS 7.1, but FreeDOS supports 2TB.

 

[dave_the_nerd]

Scary isn't it where Window's has no say. 40 year old Tech go $%^* yourself!

You did read where I said you should use Linux?

 

[Cerb]

Perhaps DOS X-FAT is limited to 32GB Volumes - I don't KNOW and hence the reason for this thread, I wonder if anyone has experienced X-FAT, which may over come that limit.

FAT32 is limited to 2TB, not 32GB.

ExFAT (not X-FAT) is a committee-chosen abortion of a FS, derived from old Windows CE needs, and without transaction safety of any useful degree (I know it's optional, but being optional, it's not going to be used). Supporting over 4GB movies is the only reason we know about it or care about it (with the large default cluster sizes, it's a slow/wasteful POS for small files).

Just move to Clonezilla or something else, already, and you won't have to worry about it all, with included FAT32 and NTFS support.

 

[Lorne]

How about running in the non-GUI part of 2K?
Install as normal with all the drivers needed, Then make any other settings/edits.
Go into the properties (forget where) and set it no GUI and just DOS prompt.
I have seen this done before.

 

[Elixer]

Good news, MS just released the source code to DOS.
http://blogs.technet.com/b/microsof...and-word-for-windows-available-to-public.aspx

Now, just pay someone to fix DOS for you. Simple.