ntfs or fat32 for win2k?

[deras]

i am going up to win2k on one of my computers because the stability of 98 is just horrible...

anyway i have two other computers connected to me via a network.. should i use fat32 or ntfs for the win2k system keeping in mind i still need to file share with the other computers....

pro's and con's of each...

 

[Rescind]

Definitely NTFS. All the filesystems are shared through the SMB protocol, so the filesystem doesn't really have a bearing on how it's shared. The only area that is affected is that on NTFS shares, you must implicitly specify what people accessing the share can do by setting permissions for the Guest account. Other than that, there's really no reason to go with FAT32 unless you need to be able to access the filesystem in other operating systems (Linux and BeOS have NTFS read modules, but no write support), or if you think that at some point you'll be downgrading back to 98.

 

[SufferinSuccotash]

NTFS uses smaller allocation units, too (512 bytes on an 8.4 GB partition), so you get more bang for your buck in terms of disk space. It also lets you enable security and auditing, in case you need it.

 

[AndyHui]

NTFS if you want security, FAT32 if you want Win95B+ or Win98 to access the partition as well.

I think the overhead for NTFS is larger because of the security, but other than that, Win2K really flies on NTFS.

 

[BCYL]

I just installed win2k on one of my computers on my network, while the others are still running win98... I am using NTFS for the win2k machine... So for the other computers to access my files, what do I need to do?

 

[Wizkid]

If they are accessing it over a network, then you don't have to do anything. It will work already

The only time a problem occurs is if you dual boot on one machine. Then you need to use FAT32 for both win9x and win2k to be able to read the files.