Is Windows 2Kpro more stable than W98 because of NTFS or even with Fat32?

[bupkus]

Is Windows 2Kpro more stable than W98 because of NTFS or even with Fat32?

I may need to use Fat32 in a W2KP install but I still expect greater stability inspite of not using NTFS.

I don't need security as it's a one person closed environment but I know NTSF provides something else that fat32 doesn't.

 

[networkman]

NTFS vs. FAT: Which is right for you?

I realize the above article is under the heading of "XP" but the principle is the same.

And to show I'm not a biased Microsoft nut, here's an article on same issue right from our own Anandtech site.

As to the issue of stability, Win2k is a whole lot more stable than Win98 regardless of which type of format you end up using.

 

[Steve]

NTFS seems to be less susceptible to corruption, so I'd say 2000 has a staibility advantage in that sense. But the major factor in stability between the two is memory management.

 

[Smilin]

Originally posted by: bupkus
Is Windows 2Kpro more stable than W98 because of NTFS or even with Fat32?

I may need to use Fat32 in a W2KP install but I still expect greater stability inspite of not using NTFS.

I don't need security as it's a one person closed environment but I know NTSF provides something else that fat32 doesn't.

The stability is due

Man, I don't even want to go down this road.

Let's do this the quick way. Please post Why are you not using NTFS?. Only reason I can think of is some sort of dual boot scenario.

 

[bsobel]

Man, I don't even want to go down this road.
Let's do this the quick way. Please post Why are you not using NTFS?. Only reason I can think of is some sort of dual boot scenario.

Amen. Let us know why you don't think FAT32 will work for you, at least let us try to see if it will. Overall 2k will be much more stable than 98 (night and day). Howver, the FAT file system is fragile and prone to corruption if you do have any issues (including power failure).

Bill

 

[bupkus]

I have this turn-key solution originally done for Win98. It's a client record keeping program for a small business. I tried installing in W2KP with NTFS but it wouldn't run. I may try again now that I'm encouraged to see it appears to run in W2KP when using fat32 which I'd never tried.
I just popped the installation CD into this XP machine and here's a couple files in the "utilities" folder that may give a better clue about the app.

mfc42.exe
mdac_typ.exe
mscal.exe
DCOM95.exe

I believe there's a MS database engine in this app.

Open mdac_type.exe and get:
Microsoft Data Access Components 2.5 already installed blah blah.. see microsoft.com/data
Open mfc42.exe and get:
MFC DLL version 6.0.8447... The MS MFC DLLs (608k) are necessary to run this control blah blah Install DLL's?
Open mscal.exe and get:
ActiveX Calendar Control EULA, sign here in blood.

Well, I hope this means something to someone.

 

[Nothinman]

It means the app is crap.

 

[bupkus]

Originally posted by: Nothinman
It means the app is crap.

12,123 posts and that's your contribution?

Until I write my own with MySQL it's the one we're gonna use.

 

[Nothinman]

Filesystem shouldn't affect an app in any significant way (barring things like wrong NTFS permissions) unless it's a really lowlevel app like a defrag, repair, etc tool.

 

[bupkus]

I'm gonna give it another try this weekend. I don't know why it didn't work last time I tried so I'll see.

Thanks, all. I'll be back to report my results.

 

[Smilin]

Although this isn't the best idea, it's better than not using NTFS for the whole system...

If your app is giving you trouble, set the permissions on it's install folder to everyone:full control. Run the app while logged on as an administrator (also not a good idea typically). If the app still has problems I *guarantee* it's unrelated to NTFS.

What the final solution is, I don't know without a whole bunch more info. If you've done the above then NTFS has nothing to do with it so for a bajillion other reasons please use NTFS.


Some options to consider:
application compatibility mode, win 9x mode, compatibility security template.
An almost surefire answer: run it inside MS Virtual PC - you can download a 45 day trial from Microsoft.


Good Luck!

PS: don't get upset with Nothinman. Of his 12000 posts I'm betting at least 100 of them were explaining the technical details of NTFS-vs-FAT and in 90 of those the guy on the other end didn't know much and wanted to argue. Anyone with a decent post count has been there. grrr.

 

[Nothinman]

You could also run filemon while running the app to figure out where it's failing.

 

[bupkus]

All excellent suggestions and insights. My confidence is running high, thanks to each and every one of you.
Now to install onto NTFS!

 

[bupkus]

New question.
What about Service Packs? I have SP4 on disk but doesn't that use a different NTFS? NTFS5? What do I do now? Do I need to slip stream? Can I just install onto NTFS and maybe convert the FS to 5 later? Do the additional features of of 5 even matter to my simple application?

FS comparisons

 

[Nothinman]

I don't think SP4 included any NTFS on-disk format updates, but I can't say for sure. And no you don't have a choice on upgrading, once you install a SP that includes a NTFS on-disk update it upgrades each filesystem as they're mounted, thank MS for that nice feature.

 

[gwag]

partition it, 1 giant ntfs and 1 10MB for your old program.....

 

[VirtualLarry]

Originally posted by: bsobel
Amen. Let us know why you don't think FAT32 will work for you, at least let us try to see if it will. Overall 2k will be much more stable than 98 (night and day).

Agreed, W2K is definately light-years ahead of any Win9x.

Originally posted by: bsobel
Howver, the FAT file system is fragile and prone to corruption if you do have any issues (including power failure).

But then again, so is NTFS. The biggest advantage of NTFS is security ACL support and support for larger (> 4GB) file sizes. FAT32 has a slight performance advantage, especially in scenarios involving the rapid creation and deletion of many small files.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Originally posted by: bupkus
I have this turn-key solution originally done for Win98. It's a client record keeping program for a small business. I tried installing in W2KP with NTFS but it wouldn't run. I may try again now that I'm encouraged to see it appears to run in W2KP when using fat32 which I'd never tried.
I just popped the installation CD into this XP machine and here's a couple files in the "utilities" folder that may give a better clue about the app.

mfc42.exe
mdac_typ.exe
mscal.exe
DCOM95.exe

I believe there's a MS database engine in this app.

Looks like the MS Jet runtimes, those definately won't install on W2K, you need to obtain the W2K version of the redistributable runtimes for those, and install them on the system. Then the app should hopefully run fine.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Originally posted by: Nothinman
I don't think SP4 included any NTFS on-disk format updates, but I can't say for sure.

Considering that W2K SP4 was released after XP was, and that XP updated the NTFS on-disk format slightly, I'm pretty sure that W2K SP4 included an update to support compatible interoperability with NTFS volumes created/updated by XP ("NTFS 5.1"), when running on a dual-boot system. NT4 SP3 or SP4 (SP5?) included something similar, for dealing with NTFS volumes created by W2K on a dual-boot system.

Originally posted by: Nothinman
And no you don't have a choice on upgrading, once you install a SP that includes a NTFS on-disk update it upgrades each filesystem as they're mounted, thank MS for that nice feature.

Not to mention, the apparent lack of the ability to mount (disk) filesystems read-only.

 

[Nothinman]

FAT32 has a slight performance advantage, especially in scenarios involving the rapid creation and deletion of many small files.

I don't know what your definition of many is, but NTFS is lightyears faster than FAT with regards to creation and deletion of thousands of files.

Considering that W2K SP4 was released after XP was, and that XP updated the NTFS on-disk format slightly, I'm pretty sure that W2K SP4 included an update to support compatible interoperability with NTFS volumes created/updated by XP ("NTFS 5.1"), when running on a dual-boot system. NT4 SP3 or SP4 (SP5?) included something similar, for dealing with NTFS volumes created by W2K on a dual-boot system.

If there was an update it was extremely minor, because unlike with the NT4 SP4 update you could remove the SP and still boot the system.

 

[bsobel]

Originally posted by: bsobel
Howver, the FAT file system is fragile and prone to corruption if you do have any issues (including power failure).

But then again, so is NTFS. The biggest advantage of NTFS is security ACL support and support for larger (> 4GB) file sizes. FAT32 has a slight performance advantage, especially in scenarios involving the rapid creation and deletion of many small files.

NTFS is just as prone to corruption as FAT? Wrong (but not surpsing, it's part of your collection of anti-ms LIES).

Bill

 

[bupkus]

Originally posted by: VirtualLarry

Originally posted by: bupkus
I have this turn-key solution originally done for Win98. It's a client record keeping program for a small business. I tried installing in W2KP with NTFS but it wouldn't run. I may try again now that I'm encouraged to see it appears to run in W2KP when using fat32 which I'd never tried.
I just popped the installation CD into this XP machine and here's a couple files in the "utilities" folder that may give a better clue about the app.

mfc42.exe
mdac_typ.exe
mscal.exe
DCOM95.exe

I believe there's a MS database engine in this app.

Looks like the MS Jet runtimes, those definately won't install on W2K, you need to obtain the W2K version of the redistributable runtimes for those, and install them on the system. Then the app should hopefully run fine.

I just installed the app onto a W2Kp with NTFS and oddly enough it seems to run just fine.
I have no idea what went wrong last time unless in my inexperience I created a "limited" account and it wouldn't run from there. I could easily enough test out that theory.
IAC, I'm quite happy with it thus far.
Larry, I'm going to try to follow up on what you said about the MS Jet runtimes. Quite honestly, I don't know what that is. Is it anything like the Java run time?

 

[bsobel]

Larry, I'm going to try to follow up on what you said about the MS Jet runtimes. Quite honestly, I don't know what that is. Is it anything like the Java run time?

The jet runtimes are the mdac_type.exe you referenced. This is the Microsoft data access components (basically the free database your app is using for storage). The components are included in Windows 2000 and above. VL is wrong that you are going to need to get the W2k redist (as you've already found out).

Bill

 

[Smilin]

Originally posted by: bsobel

Larry, I'm going to try to follow up on what you said about the MS Jet runtimes. Quite honestly, I don't know what that is. Is it anything like the Java run time?

The jet runtimes are the mdac_type.exe you referenced. This is the Microsoft data access components (basically the free database your app is using for storage). The components are included in Windows 2000 and above. VL is wrong that you are going to need to get the W2k redist (as you've already found out).

Bill

VL is completely full of sh1t. Completely. Dude you would be so wise just to pretend that his posts do not even exist in this thread. The guy is unbelieveable. Normally I avoid him like the plague just because his mouth is absolutely endless. If you explain to him that the sky truly is blue he'll have some kind of arguement to the contrary. It's ludicrous.

I'm only subjecting myself to his potential blabbing because he appears to have pulled an unsuspecting victim into his grasp.

I have saved you and you owe me one!!!

I leave you in the more than capable hands of bsobel and nothingman (and possibly some others I'm neglecting - apologies).

Good luck!

 

[Smilin]

Not to mention, the apparent lack of the ability to mount (disk) filesystems read-only.

bwaahahahahahahaha!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Stupid MS didn't include a cheese grater for my transmission! Those bastards! Good old larry. He wouldn't be happy with MS if Bill split his fortune with him.

W2K SP4 included an update to support compatible interoperability with NTFS volumes created/updated by XP ("NTFS 5.1"), when running on a dual-boot system.

Where do you come up with this spectacular fiction dude?!?!? You should write children's books or fairy tales or something. WTF is NTFS 5.1 ?!?!?!?! Oh man I broke my liver when I read this.