fat32 of ntfs?

[alfa147x]

fat32 of ntfs?
for a 40 gig
running windows xp pro?

thanks

 

[alfa147x]

and ~726mb of ram
athlon xp 3000+

 

[KoolDrew]

NTFS.

 

[Fresh Daemon]

NTFS.

:thumbsup:

 

[jswjimmy]

new technology file system...

unless you want to maybe dual boot with an older operating system or linux

also with new technology file system you will pick up a gigabyte or two over file allocation table.

(this is my antiacronym post 🙂 )

 

[birdpup]

Microsoft does not support FAT32 partitions larger than 32GB. FAT32 can theoretically support larger partitions than 32GB but, ironically, it takes linux or BSD to create and FAT format the partition.

Edit:
Description of the FAT32 File System
Limitations of FAT32 File System

 

[BW86]

Originally posted by: KoolDrew
NTFS.

QFT :thumbsup:

 

[CQuinn]

Originally posted by: jswjimmy
new technology file system...

(this is my antiacronym post 🙂 )

Sorry to disrupt your post, but NT has not stood for "New Technology" for
several years now.

 

[JetBlack69]

Originally posted by: CQuinn

Originally posted by: jswjimmy
new technology file system...

(this is my antiacronym post 🙂 )

Sorry to disrupt your post, but NT has not stood for "New Technology" for
several years now.

So, what does it stand for now? 😕

 

[networkman]

CE + ME + NT = CEMENT ?? 😕

NTFS would be my choice as well. If you were going to share the drive and wanted to be able to have older Win9x boxes read files, I'd say make second partition and formated that with FAT32.

 

[bsobel]

NTFS would be my choice as well. If you were going to share the drive and wanted to be able to have older Win9x boxes read files, I'd say make second partition and formated that with FAT32.

Not sure where you heard this, but it is completely false. The file system of the network drive does not effect the clients. Win9x boxes can read NTFS shares just fine.

 

[bsobel]

Originally posted by: CQuinn

Originally posted by: jswjimmy
new technology file system...

(this is my antiacronym post 🙂 )

Sorry to disrupt your post, but NT has not stood for "New Technology" for
several years now.

However, the definition of NTFS hasn't changed as a result....

 

[spherrod]

NTFS

 

[JackMDS]

If you need a "Non-Cultural" answer (I.e. Not every thing in life has to be reduced to Windows Vs. Linux).

http://www.ntfs.com/ntfs_vs_fat.htm

http://www.ntfs.com/faq.htm

:sun:

 

[dawks]

Originally posted by: bsobel

NTFS would be my choice as well. If you were going to share the drive and wanted to be able to have older Win9x boxes read files, I'd say make second partition and formated that with FAT32.

Not sure where you heard this, but it is completely false. The file system of the network drive does not effect the clients. Win9x boxes can read NTFS shares just fine.

By sharing I think he means dual boot.

 

[Jeff7]

<-- Also waiting to see what NTFS stands for now, if it's not "new technology". 🙂
Nice Try File System?

 

[kamper]

Originally posted by: Jeff7
<-- Also waiting to see what NTFS stands for now, if it's not "new technology". 🙂
Nice Try File System?

:laugh: lol "Windows, Nice Try" Too bad that name isn't in use any more 😛

 

[JetBlack69]

Originally posted by: Jeff7
<-- Also waiting to see what NTFS stands for now, if it's not "new technology". 🙂
Nice Try File System?

I'm waiting too...

 

[alfa147x]

1)a)i)(1)(a)(i)1.a.i.ii.iii.iv.v.vi.vii.viii.ix.x.xi.xii.xiii.xiv.xv.xvi.xvii.x
iii.xix.xx.xxi.xxii.xxiii.xxiv.xxv.xxvi.xxvii.xxviii.xxix.xxx.xxxi.xxxii.xxxiii
xxxiv.xxxv.xxxvi.xxxvii.xxxviii.xxxix.xl.xli.xlii.xliii.xliv.xlv.xlvi.xlvii.xlv
ii.xlix.l.li.lii.liii.liv.lv.lvi.lvii.lviii.lix.lx.lxi.lxii.lxiii.lxiv.lxv.lxvi
lxvii.lxviii.lxix.lxx.lxxi.lxxii.lxxiii.lxxiv.lxxv.lxxvi.lxxvii.lxxviii.lxxix.l
xx.lxxxi.lxxxii.lxxxiii.lxxxiv.lxxxv.lxxxvi.lxxxvii.lxxxviii.lxxxix.xc.xci.xcii
xciii.xciv.