Can't format 64 GB USB flash drives as FAT32?
 

Hello.

I noticed both updated 64bit Windows 7 HPE SP1 & 10 EE won't let me
reformat my new 64 GB flash drives as FAT32 (default originally). Their
Explorers only gave me NTFS & exFAT. Why no old FAT32? Not everything
know exFAT & NTFS. :(

Thank you in adance. :)
--
Quote of the Week: "Any spoke will lead the ant to the hub." --unknown
Note: A fixed width font (Courier, Monospace, etc.) is required to see this signature correctly.
/\___/\ Ant(Dude) @ http://antfarm.home.dhs.org (Personal Web Site)
/ /\ /\ \ Ant's Quality Foraged Links: http://aqfl.net
| |o o| |
\ _ / Please nuke ANT if replying by e-mail privately. If credit-
( ) ing, then please kindly use Ant nickname and AQFL URL/link.

Can't format 64 GB USB flash drives as FAT32?
 

On Fri, 25 Nov 2016 17:06:43 -0600, (Ant) wrote:

Hello.

I noticed both updated 64bit Windows 7 HPE SP1 & 10 EE won't let me
reformat my new 64 GB flash drives as FAT32 (default originally). Their
Explorers only gave me NTFS & exFAT. Why no old FAT32? Not everything
know exFAT & NTFS. :(


Since Windows XP, Windows has a limit on how large a FAT32
partition it can *create*. It's 32GB.

However it has no problem *using* a larger FAT32 partition if
created externally.

Can't format 64 GB USB flash drives as FAT32?
 

On 25-Nov-2016 6:06 PM, Ant wrote:
Hello.

I noticed both updated 64bit Windows 7 HPE SP1 & 10 EE won't let me
reformat my new 64 GB flash drives as FAT32 (default originally). Their
Explorers only gave me NTFS & exFAT. Why no old FAT32? Not everything
know exFAT & NTFS. :(

Thank you in adance. :)


Same here on Windows 10 home 64bits for USB 3.0 64GB and USB 3.0 128GB.
NTFS and exFAT only.
Using MiniTool Partition Wizard I can format in: FAT32, NTFS, Ext2,
Ext3, Ext4 and Linux Swap but no exFAT.
This is weird.

Can't format 64 GB USB flash drives as FAT32?
 

Ant wrote:

I noticed both updated 64bit Windows 7 HPE SP1 & 10 EE won't let me
reformat my new 64 GB flash drives as FAT32 (default originally). Their
Explorers only gave me NTFS & exFAT. Why no old FAT32?

Open a command shell (cmd.exe) with admin privileges. Use the
format.exe program inside the command shell. Run "format /?" for help.
You'll need to use the /fs:fat32 argument. explorer.exe has code to fix
the limitation to 32GB hence why you cannot use it beyond that capacity.
This was a deliberate ploy to get users to move to NTFS.

Or use a 3rd party (non-Microsoft) partition manager if you need a GUI.

Can't format 64 GB USB flash drives as FAT32?
 

On 26/11/2016 00:56, VanguardLH wrote:
Ant wrote:

I noticed both updated 64bit Windows 7 HPE SP1 & 10 EE won't let me
reformat my new 64 GB flash drives as FAT32 (default originally). Their
Explorers only gave me NTFS & exFAT. Why no old FAT32?

Open a command shell (cmd.exe) with admin privileges. Use the
format.exe program inside the command shell. Run "format /?" for help.
You'll need to use the /fs:fat32 argument. explorer.exe has code to fix
the limitation to 32GB hence why you cannot use it beyond that capacity.
This was a deliberate ploy to get users to move to NTFS.

Or use a 3rd party (non-Microsoft) partition manager if you need a GUI.


I think this supposed "limitation" appeared when Microsoft introduced
their proprietary ExFAT format.

I think even Microsoft know NTFS isn't a good idea on flash storage that
doesn't have wear levelling.

--

Brian Gregory (in the UK).
To email me please remove all the letter vee from my email address.

Can't format 64 GB USB flash drives as FAT32?
 

On 11/25/2016 7:01 PM, Sergey wrote:
Same here on Windows 10 home 64bits for USB 3.0 64GB and USB 3.0 128GB.
NTFS and exFAT only.
Using MiniTool Partition Wizard I can format in: FAT32, NTFS, Ext2,
Ext3, Ext4 and Linux Swap but no exFAT.
This is weird.


ExFAT is proprietary, Microsoft wants to charge money for using it. The
patents on FAT32 and NTFS ran out long ago, that's why Linux can now
fully use both filesystems nowadays, whereas in the olden days they were
limited to read-only access or **** like that.

Yousuf Khan

Can't format 64 GB USB flash drives as FAT32?
 

In article , bbbl67
@spammenot.yahoo.com says...

On 11/25/2016 7:01 PM, Sergey wrote:
Same here on Windows 10 home 64bits for USB 3.0 64GB and USB 3.0 128GB.
NTFS and exFAT only.
Using MiniTool Partition Wizard I can format in: FAT32, NTFS, Ext2,
Ext3, Ext4 and Linux Swap but no exFAT.
This is weird.


ExFAT is proprietary, Microsoft wants to charge money for using it. The
patents on FAT32 and NTFS ran out long ago, that's why Linux can now
fully use both filesystems nowadays, whereas in the olden days they were
limited to read-only access or **** like that.

Yousuf Khan

I was under the understanding Mac's read/write to exFat. I even
formatted one of my externals once to facilitate visiting a Mac friend
once. Visit didn't happen so still don't know for sure. Can't see Apple
paying MS to support it's file system?

Can't format 64 GB USB flash drives as FAT32?
 

On 11/25/2016 7:01 PM, Yousuf Khan wrote:

ExFAT has some of the security
descriptors from NTFS, without any of the journaling features which can
be used in fixing filesystem errors. Etc.

Yousuf Khan

I always format usb drives ntfs, because I remember how easily FAT 32
got wrecked when Win 98 crashed. Many errors to fix. I don't know if
it's true, but I read an article saying that ntfs is faster on clusters
of small files than fat 32.
--
Ed Light

Better World News TV Channel:
http://realnews.com

Send spam to the FTC at

Thanks, robots.

Can't format 64 GB USB flash drives as FAT32?
 

pjp wrote:

I was under the understanding Mac's read/write to exFat.

Correct. The Mac operating system comes with read-only support for NTFS
volumes but full read-write support for FAT and ExFAT. Third-party
software is required to write to an NTFS volume.


I even formatted one of my externals once to facilitate visiting a Mac
friend once. Visit didn't happen so still don't know for sure. Can't see
Apple paying MS to support it's file system?

That's my understanding of why Apple doesn't provide full support for
NTFS: it's proprietary.

Can't format 64 GB USB flash drives as FAT32?
 

Neill Massello wrote:
pjp wrote:

I was under the understanding Mac's read/write to exFat.

Correct. The Mac operating system comes with read-only support for NTFS
volumes but full read-write support for FAT and ExFAT. Third-party
software is required to write to an NTFS volume.


I even formatted one of my externals once to facilitate visiting a Mac
friend once. Visit didn't happen so still don't know for sure. Can't see
Apple paying MS to support it's file system?

That's my understanding of why Apple doesn't provide full support for
NTFS: it's proprietary.


The option is available.

http://osxdaily.com/2013/10/02/enabl...port-mac-os-x/

And Apple and Microsoft have a history.

https://www.engadget.com/2014/05/20/...ment-in-apple/

"Steve Jobs and Bill Gates announced that the two companies had entered into a
historic agreement. In addition to agreeing to a broad patent cross-licensing ----
agreement, Microsoft promised to support Microsoft Office for the Mac for 5 years
while Apple agreed to make Internet Explorer the default web browser on the Mac.

Microsoft also promised to invest approximately $150 million for shares of
Apple non-voting preferred stock. Though the Mac faithful at the time were
wary of Microsoft, Steve Jobs at the time famously explained that "we have
to let go of this notion that for Apple to win, Microsoft has to lose."

The deal between the two companies was mutually beneficial from every angle.
Apple got some much needed cash while Microsoft was able to keep a weakened
competitor afloat, thereby alleviating concerns about the company's
monopolistic power.
"

I'm sure there is more to the story than meets the eye.

*******

One thing about foreign NTFS access, is the risk depends
on what you're doing with it.

If you bring an NTFS data drive to a foreign computer,
the risk with analogs of the NTFS-3G driver are low.

Just be careful what you do to C: (OS) partitions over there.
I've trashed Win7 C: via Linux, while reading files in
C:\System Volume Information. Luckily, I had a backup
image made two hours earlier at the time. You don't get
that lucky very often. I tried to repair with CHKDSK but
it didn't work. Whatever the problem was, it was that bad.

Paul

Can't format 64 GB USB flash drives as FAT32?
 

In alt.comp.os.windows-10, on Sat, 26 Nov 2016 01:31:16 +0000, Brian
Gregory wrote:

On 26/11/2016 00:56, VanguardLH wrote:
Ant wrote:

I noticed both updated 64bit Windows 7 HPE SP1 & 10 EE won't let me
reformat my new 64 GB flash drives as FAT32 (default originally). Their
Explorers only gave me NTFS & exFAT. Why no old FAT32?

Open a command shell (cmd.exe) with admin privileges. Use the
format.exe program inside the command shell. Run "format /?" for help.
You'll need to use the /fs:fat32 argument. explorer.exe has code to fix
the limitation to 32GB hence why you cannot use it beyond that capacity.
This was a deliberate ploy to get users to move to NTFS.

Or use a 3rd party (non-Microsoft) partition manager if you need a GUI.


I think this supposed "limitation" appeared when Microsoft introduced
their proprietary ExFAT format.

I think even Microsoft know NTFS isn't a good idea on flash storage that
doesn't have wear levelling.

So would ExFAT be better than FAT32 also, for the sake of wear?

Can't format 64 GB USB flash drives as FAT32?
 

On 11/25/2016 10:25 PM, pjp wrote:
I was under the understanding Mac's read/write to exFat. I even
formatted one of my externals once to facilitate visiting a Mac friend
once. Visit didn't happen so still don't know for sure. Can't see Apple
paying MS to support it's file system?

Sure, why wouldn't Apple pay Microsoft?

Yousuf Khan

Can't format 64 GB USB flash drives as FAT32?
 

In message om, Ed
Light writes:
On 11/25/2016 7:01 PM, Yousuf Khan wrote:

ExFAT has some of the security
descriptors from NTFS, without any of the journaling features which can
be used in fixing filesystem errors. Etc.

Yousuf Khan

I always format usb drives ntfs, because I remember how easily FAT 32
got wrecked when Win 98 crashed. Many errors to fix. I don't know if
it's true, but I read an article saying that ntfs is faster on clusters
of small files than fat 32.

I _once_ had a FAT system crash, and it did indeed right royally screw
up the file system: I think irretrievably, certainly with the knowledge
I had then: directories (including the root) full of filenames with
random characters in them. But I only had it once. (I also can't be
_sure_ it was the file system that was responsible; I to some extent
suspect not, or not entirely, though don't ask me why: I still feel FAT,
being somewhat simpler, is _less_ likely to go wrong in that way. But I
don't know enough about the inner workings of either to be sure.)

I haven't thought of using it on USB sticks - I don't use them enough,
mainly just for moving files between devices (and there the universality
of FAT probably wins) - but I have a simple reason for using NTFS on any
new HD partition: as far as I can see, Everything (the search utility)
doesn't appear to work on FAT. It's a trivial reason, but I find
Everything so useful that it was sufficient to make me change my policy
in this respect.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

A man does not have to be an angel in order to be saint.
Albert Schweitzer (1875-1965)

Can't format 64 GB USB flash drives as FAT32?
 

In message , Yousuf Khan
writes:
[]
ExFAT is proprietary, Microsoft wants to charge money for using it. The
patents on FAT32 and NTFS ran out long ago, that's why Linux can now
[]
And Neill Massello says:

That's my understanding of why Apple doesn't provide full support for
NTFS: it's proprietary.

I guess you _could_ both be right! Though I saw Yousuf's post first.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

A man does not have to be an angel in order to be saint.
Albert Schweitzer (1875-1965)

Can't format 64 GB USB flash drives as FAT32?
 

On 11/26/2016 12:59 AM, Ed Light wrote:
I always format usb drives ntfs, because I remember how easily FAT 32
got wrecked when Win 98 crashed. Many errors to fix. I don't know if
it's true, but I read an article saying that ntfs is faster on clusters
of small files than fat 32.

It's a legitimate filesystem to put on a USB stick, if all you ever want
to do is have it read by other PC's. I sometimes use my USB sticks in
settop boxes and DVD players too, and they don't read NTFS. But the NTFS
is a more robust filesystem, for sure.

Yousuf Khan

Can't format 64 GB USB flash drives as FAT32?
 

Paul wrote:

One thing about foreign NTFS access, is the risk depends
on what you're doing with it.

True. Access with Linux can harm as easily as it can fix if you don't
know what you are doing since all are just files...


If you bring an NTFS data drive to a foreign computer,
the risk with analogs of the NTFS-3G driver are low.

Just be careful what you do to C: (OS) partitions over there.
I've trashed Win7 C: via Linux, while reading files in
C:\System Volume Information. Luckily, I had a backup
image made two hours earlier at the time. You don't get
that lucky very often. I tried to repair with CHKDSK but
it didn't work. Whatever the problem was, it was that bad.


Well futzing with the System Volume Information can get you in trouble
regardless of the OS, but I have repaired a number of Windows systems
with Linux. Removed corrupted Windows-invalid named files, caused by
drive corruption, infections, and copy "protection". Hunted down hidden
regenerating malware. Only issue that I ever noticed while piecing
together corrupted Windows profiles with Linux is transferred files
where missing the 8.3 old DOS listings.

--
Take care,

Jonathan
-------------------
LITTLE WORKS STUDIO
http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com

Can't format 64 GB USB flash drives as FAT32?
 

On 2016-11-25 6:06 PM, Ant wrote:
Hello.

I noticed both updated 64bit Windows 7 HPE SP1 & 10 EE won't let me
reformat my new 64 GB flash drives as FAT32 (default originally). Their
Explorers only gave me NTFS & exFAT. Why no old FAT32? Not everything
know exFAT & NTFS. :(

Thank you in adance. :)

There are limitations to FAT32 partition sizes as far as I know. The
same way that FAT16 was limited to 2GB (if I remember correctly), FAT32
has limitations of 4GB for file sizes so it would be an issue for you
going forward and the filesystem is therefore to be avoided.

https://wiki.vuze.com/w/FAT32_file_size_limit


--
Silver Slimer
Fingerprint: e58428b2633833a3b0c9bb7e40819166642245b7
Gab.ai: @silverslimer

Can't format 64 GB USB flash drives as FAT32?
 

In message , Silver Slimer
writes:
On 2016-11-25 6:06 PM, Ant wrote:
Hello.

I noticed both updated 64bit Windows 7 HPE SP1 & 10 EE won't let me
reformat my new 64 GB flash drives as FAT32 (default originally). Their
Explorers only gave me NTFS & exFAT. Why no old FAT32? Not everything
know exFAT & NTFS. :(

Thank you in adance. :)

There are limitations to FAT32 partition sizes as far as I know. The
same way that FAT16 was limited to 2GB (if I remember correctly), FAT32
has limitations of 4GB for file sizes so it would be an issue for you
going forward and the filesystem is therefore to be avoided.

https://wiki.vuze.com/w/FAT32_file_size_limit

Only if (a) he _wants_ to move files bigger than 4G (b) everywhere he
might want to use the stick can handle NTFS.

--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

After I'm dead I'd rather have people ask why I have no monument than why I
have one. -Cato the Elder, statesman, soldier, and writer (234-149 BCE)

Can't format 64 GB USB flash drives as FAT32?
 

On 11/25/2016 at 6:06 PM, Ant's prodigious digits fired off:
Hello.

I noticed both updated 64bit Windows 7 HPE SP1 & 10 EE won't let me
reformat my new 64 GB flash drives as FAT32 (default originally). Their
Explorers only gave me NTFS & exFAT. Why no old FAT32? Not everything
know exFAT & NTFS. :(

Thank you in adance. :)


http://www.partition-tool.com/resource/manage-partition/format-64gb-sd-card-to-fat32.html

--
Ed Mullen
http://edmullen.net/
It's lonely at the top, but you eat better.

Can't format 64 GB USB flash drives as FAT32?
 

On 26/11/2016 09:11, micky wrote:
In alt.comp.os.windows-10, on Sat, 26 Nov 2016 01:31:16 +0000, Brian
Gregory wrote:

On 26/11/2016 00:56, VanguardLH wrote:
Ant wrote:

I noticed both updated 64bit Windows 7 HPE SP1 & 10 EE won't let me
reformat my new 64 GB flash drives as FAT32 (default originally). Their
Explorers only gave me NTFS & exFAT. Why no old FAT32?

Open a command shell (cmd.exe) with admin privileges. Use the
format.exe program inside the command shell. Run "format /?" for help.
You'll need to use the /fs:fat32 argument. explorer.exe has code to fix
the limitation to 32GB hence why you cannot use it beyond that capacity.
This was a deliberate ploy to get users to move to NTFS.

Or use a 3rd party (non-Microsoft) partition manager if you need a GUI.


I think this supposed "limitation" appeared when Microsoft introduced
their proprietary ExFAT format.

I think even Microsoft know NTFS isn't a good idea on flash storage that
doesn't have wear levelling.

So would ExFAT be better than FAT32 also, for the sake of wear?


Not as far as I know.

--

Brian Gregory (in the UK).
To email me please remove all the letter vee from my email address.

Can't format 64 GB USB flash drives as FAT32?
 

On 11/26/2016 09:11 AM, Silver Slimer wrote:

[snip]

There are limitations to FAT32 partition sizes as far as I know. The
same way that FAT16 was limited to 2GB (if I remember correctly), FAT32
has limitations of 4GB for file sizes so it would be an issue for you
going forward and the filesystem is therefore to be avoided.

https://wiki.vuze.com/w/FAT32_file_size_limit

FAT(32) is limited by the use of a 32-bit field to store the number of
sectors on a disk. 2 ^ 32 * 512 = 2TB. This is the limit for FAT32.

BTW, the same number is the limit for physical drives with MBR.

--
29 days until the winter celebration (Sunday December 25, 2016 12:00:00
AM for 1 day).

Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.us/

"Philosophy is questions that may never be answered. Religion is answers
that may never be questioned."

Can't format 64 GB USB flash drives as FAT32?
 

Jonathan N. Little wrote:
Paul wrote:
One thing about foreign NTFS access, is the risk depends
on what you're doing with it.

True. Access with Linux can harm as easily as it can fix if you don't
know what you are doing since all are just files...

If you bring an NTFS data drive to a foreign computer,
the risk with analogs of the NTFS-3G driver are low.

Just be careful what you do to C: (OS) partitions over there.
I've trashed Win7 C: via Linux, while reading files in
C:\System Volume Information. Luckily, I had a backup
image made two hours earlier at the time. You don't get
that lucky very often. I tried to repair with CHKDSK but
it didn't work. Whatever the problem was, it was that bad.


Well futzing with the System Volume Information can get you in trouble
regardless of the OS, but I have repaired a number of Windows systems
with Linux. Removed corrupted Windows-invalid named files, caused by
drive corruption, infections, and copy "protection". Hunted down hidden
regenerating malware. Only issue that I ever noticed while piecing
together corrupted Windows profiles with Linux is transferred files
where missing the 8.3 old DOS listings.


My purpose in mentioning my Win7 incident, is to say
the risks using foreign NTFS to work on disks is low,
but the risk is not zero. If you attempt to open
C:\System Volume Information while in Windows, you
get "Access Denied". And you will find there are
a few files in Windows, that no Windows utility will even
list. The utilities all get a kind of Access Denied
result. Even NFI.exe cannot list everything
on an NTFS file system, and that utility "lives"
for such a purpose.

By going in there, I knew the dangers, but my assumption
was, that any sort of read-access would be "safe". I was
wrong. Big time wrong. I think it's OK to "ls -al"
while in there, but "sum one-of-big-files" is
off the table. The checksum of the big files happens
to be zero for all of them. I used some version
of "sum" (arithmetic checksum) with the idea being,
to see if the entire file was filled with zeros,
which it was. So whatever the file system indicates
for a structure in those, a naive access reads
out as all-zeros. But then on a reboot, it
would no longer boot. And C: was ruined.

So if I had to go in there today, I would switch
from RW to RO before trying that again :-) I would
wear galoshes, carry a climbing rope and equipment,
pack a few extra ham sandwiches, to make my escape.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...nayeurs-01.jpg

Paul

Can't format 64 GB USB flash drives as FAT32?
 

Silver Slimer wrote:
On 2016-11-25 6:06 PM, Ant wrote:
Hello.

I noticed both updated 64bit Windows 7 HPE SP1 & 10 EE won't let me
reformat my new 64 GB flash drives as FAT32 (default originally). Their
Explorers only gave me NTFS & exFAT. Why no old FAT32? Not everything
know exFAT & NTFS. :(

Thank you in adance. :)

There are limitations to FAT32 partition sizes as far as I know. The
same way that FAT16 was limited to 2GB (if I remember correctly), FAT32
has limitations of 4GB for file sizes so it would be an issue for you
going forward and the filesystem is therefore to be avoided.

https://wiki.vuze.com/w/FAT32_file_size_limit

To get around the FAT32 file size limit, you
can use stuff like a segmented ZIP.

If you had a 7GB DVD, it could be stored as three
2GB chunks and a smaller last chunk.

That makes FAT32 fine for sneakernet transfers,
but segmented ZIPs aren't all that convenient
otherwise.

Your movie player won't know what to do with the ZIP.

Paul

Can't format 64 GB USB flash drives as FAT32?
 

Paul wrote:
Jonathan N. Little wrote:
Paul wrote:
One thing about foreign NTFS access, is the risk depends
on what you're doing with it.

True. Access with Linux can harm as easily as it can fix if you don't
know what you are doing since all are just files...

If you bring an NTFS data drive to a foreign computer,
the risk with analogs of the NTFS-3G driver are low.

Just be careful what you do to C: (OS) partitions over there.
I've trashed Win7 C: via Linux, while reading files in
C:\System Volume Information. Luckily, I had a backup
image made two hours earlier at the time. You don't get
that lucky very often. I tried to repair with CHKDSK but
it didn't work. Whatever the problem was, it was that bad.


Well futzing with the System Volume Information can get you in trouble
regardless of the OS, but I have repaired a number of Windows systems
with Linux. Removed corrupted Windows-invalid named files, caused by
drive corruption, infections, and copy "protection". Hunted down hidden
regenerating malware. Only issue that I ever noticed while piecing
together corrupted Windows profiles with Linux is transferred files
where missing the 8.3 old DOS listings.


My purpose in mentioning my Win7 incident, is to say
the risks using foreign NTFS to work on disks is low,
but the risk is not zero. If you attempt to open
C:\System Volume Information while in Windows, you
get "Access Denied". And you will find there are
a few files in Windows, that no Windows utility will even
list. The utilities all get a kind of Access Denied
result. Even NFI.exe cannot list everything
on an NTFS file system, and that utility "lives"
for such a purpose.

By going in there, I knew the dangers, but my assumption
was, that any sort of read-access would be "safe". I was
wrong. Big time wrong. I think it's OK to "ls -al"
while in there, but "sum one-of-big-files" is
off the table. The checksum of the big files happens
to be zero for all of them. I used some version
of "sum" (arithmetic checksum) with the idea being,
to see if the entire file was filled with zeros,
which it was. So whatever the file system indicates
for a structure in those, a naive access reads
out as all-zeros. But then on a reboot, it
would no longer boot. And C: was ruined.

Maybe the command wrote some type of temp file that did you in. When
fixing be-malwared system I have to remember to remove .trash-000 when I
am done else the Windows user won't be able to remove it later.


So if I had to go in there today, I would switch
from RW to RO before trying that again :-) I would
wear galoshes, carry a climbing rope and equipment,
pack a few extra ham sandwiches, to make my escape.

That what I would have done, if not editing. Just mount read-only.

--
Take care,

Jonathan
-------------------
LITTLE WORKS STUDIO
http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com

Can't format 64 GB USB flash drives as FAT32?
 

Ed Mullen wrote:
On 11/25/2016 at 6:06 PM, Ant's prodigious digits fired off:
Hello.

I noticed both updated 64bit Windows 7 HPE SP1 & 10 EE won't let me
reformat my new 64 GB flash drives as FAT32 (default originally). Their
Explorers only gave me NTFS & exFAT. Why no old FAT32? Not everything
know exFAT & NTFS. :(

Thank you in adance. :)


http://www.partition-tool.com/resource/manage-partition/format-64gb-sd-card-to-fat32.html



I'd just format the sucker in Linux. ;-)

--
Take care,

Jonathan
-------------------
LITTLE WORKS STUDIO
http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com

Can't format 64 GB USB flash drives as FAT32?
 

On 2016-11-26 4:11 PM, Paul wrote:
Silver Slimer wrote:
On 2016-11-25 6:06 PM, Ant wrote:
Hello.

I noticed both updated 64bit Windows 7 HPE SP1 & 10 EE won't let me
reformat my new 64 GB flash drives as FAT32 (default originally).
Their Explorers only gave me NTFS & exFAT. Why no old FAT32? Not
everything know exFAT & NTFS. :(

Thank you in adance. :)

There are limitations to FAT32 partition sizes as far as I know. The
same way that FAT16 was limited to 2GB (if I remember correctly), FAT32
has limitations of 4GB for file sizes so it would be an issue for you
going forward and the filesystem is therefore to be avoided.

https://wiki.vuze.com/w/FAT32_file_size_limit

To get around the FAT32 file size limit, you
can use stuff like a segmented ZIP.

If you had a 7GB DVD, it could be stored as three
2GB chunks and a smaller last chunk.

That makes FAT32 fine for sneakernet transfers,
but segmented ZIPs aren't all that convenient
otherwise.

Your movie player won't know what to do with the ZIP.

I like exFAT myself and Linux _does_ support it as long as you install
the necessary utils. In Ubuntu, installing the exfat-fuse and
exfat-utils package will allow it to work albeit it won't transfer as
rapidly as it does in Windows. If that's the concern the original poster
had (it not working in the free OS), it should make him feel better to
know that it's compatible.

--
Silver Slimer
Fingerprint: e58428b2633833a3b0c9bb7e40819166642245b7
Gab.ai: @silverslimer

Can't format 64 GB USB flash drives as FAT32?
 

On 2016-11-26 4:28 PM, Jonathan N. Little wrote:
Ed Mullen wrote:
On 11/25/2016 at 6:06 PM, Ant's prodigious digits fired off:
Hello.

I noticed both updated 64bit Windows 7 HPE SP1 & 10 EE won't let me
reformat my new 64 GB flash drives as FAT32 (default originally). Their
Explorers only gave me NTFS & exFAT. Why no old FAT32? Not everything
know exFAT & NTFS. :(

Thank you in adance. :)


http://www.partition-tool.com/resource/manage-partition/format-64gb-sd-card-to-fat32.html



I'd just format the sucker in Linux. ;-)

I've had a Linux format render some of my USB sticks unusable until they
were formatted properly in Windows. I'd suggest not bothering with Linux
when it comes to a USB key.

--
Silver Slimer
Fingerprint: e58428b2633833a3b0c9bb7e40819166642245b7
Gab.ai: @silverslimer

Can't format 64 GB USB flash drives as FAT32?
 

Silver Slimer wrote:
I've had a Linux format render some of my USB sticks unusable until they
were formatted properly in Windows. I'd suggest not bothering with Linux
when it comes to a USB key.

Not been my experience. Have had memory sticks formatted in Windows not
work until reformatted in camera...but that may have been more Sony than
anything else.

--
Take care,

Jonathan
-------------------
LITTLE WORKS STUDIO
http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com

Can't format 64 GB USB flash drives as FAT32?
 

In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage Silver Slimer wrote:
On 2016-11-26 4:28 PM, Jonathan N. Little wrote:
Ed Mullen wrote:
On 11/25/2016 at 6:06 PM, Ant's prodigious digits fired off:
Hello.

I noticed both updated 64bit Windows 7 HPE SP1 & 10 EE won't let me
reformat my new 64 GB flash drives as FAT32 (default originally). Their
Explorers only gave me NTFS & exFAT. Why no old FAT32? Not everything
know exFAT & NTFS. :(

Thank you in adance. :)


http://www.partition-tool.com/resource/manage-partition/format-64gb-sd-card-to-fat32.html

I'd just format the sucker in Linux. ;-)

I've had a Linux format render some of my USB sticks unusable until they
were formatted properly in Windows. I'd suggest not bothering with Linux
when it comes to a USB key.

It has worked for me often enough, I formatted one with Linux about
a month ago. You're sure you didn't accidentally select a Linux file
system like ext4?

--
__ __
#_ |\| | _#

Can't format 64 GB USB flash drives as FAT32?
 

On 2016-11-28 4:37 PM, Computer Nerd Kev wrote:
In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage Silver Slimer wrote:
On 2016-11-26 4:28 PM, Jonathan N. Little wrote:
Ed Mullen wrote:
On 11/25/2016 at 6:06 PM, Ant's prodigious digits fired off:
Hello.

I noticed both updated 64bit Windows 7 HPE SP1 & 10 EE won't let me
reformat my new 64 GB flash drives as FAT32 (default originally). Their
Explorers only gave me NTFS & exFAT. Why no old FAT32? Not everything
know exFAT & NTFS. :(

Thank you in adance. :)


http://www.partition-tool.com/resource/manage-partition/format-64gb-sd-card-to-fat32.html

I'd just format the sucker in Linux. ;-)

I've had a Linux format render some of my USB sticks unusable until they
were formatted properly in Windows. I'd suggest not bothering with Linux
when it comes to a USB key.

It has worked for me often enough, I formatted one with Linux about
a month ago. You're sure you didn't accidentally select a Linux file
system like ext4?

I did not.


--
Silver Slimer
Fingerprint: e58428b2633833a3b0c9bb7e40819166642245b7
Gab.ai: @silverslimer

Can't format 64 GB USB flash drives as FAT32?
 

Silver Slimer wrote:
On 2016-11-28 4:37 PM, Computer Nerd Kev wrote:
In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage Silver Slimer wrote:
On 2016-11-26 4:28 PM, Jonathan N. Little wrote:
Ed Mullen wrote:
On 11/25/2016 at 6:06 PM, Ant's prodigious digits fired off:
Hello.

I noticed both updated 64bit Windows 7 HPE SP1 & 10 EE won't let me
reformat my new 64 GB flash drives as FAT32 (default originally). Their
Explorers only gave me NTFS & exFAT. Why no old FAT32? Not everything
know exFAT & NTFS. :(

Thank you in adance. :)

http://www.partition-tool.com/resource/manage-partition/format-64gb-sd-card-to-fat32.html
I'd just format the sucker in Linux. ;-)
I've had a Linux format render some of my USB sticks unusable until they
were formatted properly in Windows. I'd suggest not bothering with Linux
when it comes to a USB key.
It has worked for me often enough, I formatted one with Linux about
a month ago. You're sure you didn't accidentally select a Linux file
system like ext4?

I did not.

You do know there's a difference between
USB flash stick support in Windows versus
Linux. When Linux uses MSDOS partitioning,
it can place up to four primary partitions
on a USB stick. However, if you plug the
stick into Windows, Windows only mounts
the first partition, ignoring the other three.
So if you use Linux to put four FAT32 partitions
on a stick, Windows only mounts the first one,
and you cannot "see" the other three.

Materials can also be placed on a USB stick,
without an MBR. That's another variant.

Just be careful with what you're doing, or
attempting to do.

*******

I keep a copy of the Cygwin version of "disktype"
on my Windows partition. The Linux distros have
"disktype" in package manager. This is very handy
for analyzing just exactly what you did. Then later,
you can make sense out of it, determine what each
OS supports, and so on. I used this the other
day on a Macintosh disk image, and it could even
tell me about the HFSPlus partitions on it. It
will also analyze an ISO9660 for you (like tell you
how a hybrid Linux LiveCD works).

http://disktype.sourceforge.net/

Paul

Can't format 64 GB USB flash drives as FAT32?
 

En el artículo , Paul
escribió:

By going in there, I knew the dangers, but my assumption
was, that any sort of read-access would be "safe". I was
wrong. Big time wrong.

The answer is to mount the ntfs filesystem read-only.

mount -v -t ntfs -o ro /dev/foo /mnt/bar

Microsoft made subtle changes to ntfs between Win XP, Vista, 7, 8, and
now 10. It's antibody's guess whether third party NTFS drivers cater
for them all.

So if I had to go in there today, I would switch
from RW to RO before trying that again :-)

aye :)

--
(\_/)
(='.'=) systemd: the Linux version of Windows 10
(")_(")