• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

is FAT32 still alive

I

id3dwiz

Member
I'm just curious, if anyone is still using FAT32.
From what I remember there were some advantages of FAT32, setting a higher cluster size
as well I heard that it's faster for 3D work. Does this still hold true with current HD speeds, etc..



 
FAT32 is hack upon hack.

It's faster on small drives, but the stability problems associated with it aren't worth the small speed increase.
 
My grandmother does, but that's because she's still got Win98

I know someone still using FAT16 because they are using Win95 Retail
 
DOS which is inclusive with FAT 16/32 dosesn't see NTFS partitions as NTFS, but sees them as non-DOS partitions so I use it on a couple of my Puters 😉
 
I saw a FAT16 drive the other day. A guy was complaining that he tried to install a 200-300MB-ish program on his Dell 8100 (WinME) and he was out of space but didn't believe it. Turned out, his hard drive had died a while back and the "tech" Dell sent to replace it installed WinME onto a 2GB FAT16 partition, leaving the rest of the 40GB drive unpartitioned. Some people shouldn't be allowed near a computer with a screwdriver. Good thing I still had a copy of Partition Magic on me.
 
I'm still using it. With the problems I had with NTFS I just can't use it right now, I'll think about moving back when I get my whole system setup under control.
 
On my external harddrive, but now averybody I know have winXP, but I haven't got room to store the files elsewere to do a NTFS format.
 
Originally posted by: nortexoid
was just gonna say, my flash drive, iPod, and CF cards.
Click to expand...

Exactly! Lots of small storage devices use FAT 32 because they are not big enough to handle the NTFS overhead. So, to answer the original question - yes - FAT32 is very much still alive.
 
hehe, I guess that explains it. NTFS, that is on my next system shall be.
Is the a hit in perfomance between transfering files from FAT32 to NTFS volumes, and vise versa?
I have a 120G hd, fat32 with stuff on it, which I can't reformat, rather keep it at fat32.
From what I remember, windows XP, regognizes both types and let's you transfer back and forth,
what about win2k?

Thanks =)
 
I have a dual-boot 3.0GHz P4 system with both WinME and WinXP on a partitioned 200GB HD.

I still run WinME because there are several programs (that I enjoy) that just don't run on WinXP, period.

Ergo, I have FAT32 on a roughly 60GB partition for WinME and NTFS on a roughly 120GB partition for WinXP.

When in WinXP, I can recognize both partitions as useable (and indeed they are) and in WinME, I can only see the FAT32 C-Drive... the NTFS D-Drive is invisible to WinME.

So I use both formats, as I use both Operating Systems.
 
I have FAT32 on a 200GB external disk. I use it because I can hook it up to just about any OS and I can read and write to it. The same can't be said for NTFS.
 
Originally posted by: GonzoDaGr8
Unless your running Win9x, Then there is NO reason to be using FAT32.
Click to expand...
Except for the fact that it allows direct read/write procedures on a backup drive on a dual-boot machine with Windows/Linux.

But thats not a reason.

PS - Ive got a 250GB SATA HD formatted with FAT32. Been using it without a hitch for the past 5 months.
 
Originally posted by: GonzoDaGr8
Unless your running Win9x, Then there is NO reason to be using FAT32.
Click to expand...

I multiboot Win2000 and Win98SE, so yes, I use FAT32 some. I have an application that only runs in Win98 and besides, I find that multibooting is a big aid in troubleshooting sometimes.
 
Originally posted by: Childs
I have FAT32 on a 200GB external disk. I use it because I can hook it up to just about any OS and I can read and write to it. The same can't be said for NTFS.
Click to expand...

You have something like 33% slack on that drive with FAT32... ~66GB wasted!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top