NTFS v FAT32

I'v been looking for the pros and cons of both and which to use but can only
find stuff on how the HD sectors are made up just looking for a simple
explantion on this or website

Thanks
dave

"Dave" wrote in message
...
I'v been looking for the pros and cons of both and which to use but can
only
find stuff on how the HD sectors are made up just looking for a simple
explantion on this or website

Thanks
dave



NTFS has better security and better fault tolerance than Fat32

additionally, NTFS has better cluster size...so on large partitions...
there will be much less wasted space. Fat32 is *very* wasteful on partitions
over 32 gigs. Also, fat32 has a file size limit of 4gigs...and there is no
such
limit with NTFS

FAT16 was obsoleted by HPFS which in turn was obsoleted by
NTFS. FAT had numerous problems. In the meantime, Microsoft
needed a larger filesystem on a temporary basis for Win 98SE.
They created FAT32 only to enlarge the filesystem and made no
effort to fix so many problems with FAT - because FAT had long
been obsoleted before FAT32 was created.

Why use a filesystem that can even erase files on disk due
to a power loss? The answer is so one sided that few would
even bother comparing the two filesystems. Use NTFS and don't
even look back.


http://www.win2000mag.com/Articles/I...ArticleID=3455

Dave wrote:
I'v been looking for the pros and cons of both and which to use but
can only find stuff on how the HD sectors are made up just looking
for a simple explantion on this or website

Thanks
dave

w_tom wrote in message ...
FAT16 was obsoleted by HPFS which in turn was obsoleted by
NTFS. FAT had numerous problems. In the meantime, Microsoft
needed a larger filesystem on a temporary basis for Win 98SE.
They created FAT32 only to enlarge the filesystem and made no
effort to fix so many problems with FAT - because FAT had long
been obsoleted before FAT32 was created.

Why use a filesystem that can even erase files on disk due
to a power loss? The answer is so one sided that few would
even bother comparing the two filesystems. Use NTFS and don't
even look back.


http://www.win2000mag.com/Articles/I...ArticleID=3455

Dave wrote:
I'v been looking for the pros and cons of both and which to use but
can only find stuff on how the HD sectors are made up just looking
for a simple explantion on this or website

Thanks
dave

If you want to share the files with linux then Fat32 is probably best.
I've got Fat32 but I want NTFS. I heard that it does get fragmented.

FAT had numerous problems.

What?

Why use a filesystem that can even erase files on disk due
to a power loss?

No file system is exempt from data loss.

The answer is so one sided that few would
even bother comparing the two filesystems.

Well, I for one use largely FAT32. This is because its quicker to load the
OS, as another poster said completely compatible with linux which is such a
good thing when you are multi-booting with non-windows. Obviously if you
aren't bothered about it stick with NTFS, but since you're asking do what
I've done - I'm very happy with my set up - several partitions - some fat32,
some ntfs.

I've found that win2k boots more slowly and takes ages to recover when doing
a checkdisk which if you system is unstable and crashes a lot would benefit
a lot from having fat32 as the os partition instead.

Ultimately its up to you. There's uses for everything. None of the
filesystems are awfully bad.

On Thu, 8 Jan 2004 12:26:13 -0000 Sat down laughing as it's habit to
keep on crying then "-" wrote :

FAT had numerous problems.

What?

Why use a filesystem that can even erase files on disk due
to a power loss?

No file system is exempt from data loss.

The answer is so one sided that few would
even bother comparing the two filesystems.

Well, I for one use largely FAT32. This is because its quicker to load the
OS, as another poster said completely compatible with linux which is such a
good thing when you are multi-booting with non-windows. Obviously if you
aren't bothered about it stick with NTFS, but since you're asking do what
I've done - I'm very happy with my set up - several partitions - some fat32,
some ntfs.

I've found that win2k boots more slowly and takes ages to recover when doing
a checkdisk which if you system is unstable and crashes a lot would benefit
a lot from having fat32 as the os partition instead.

Ultimately its up to you. There's uses for everything. None of the
filesystems are awfully bad.


Ditto.More data is lost by,"Pilot Error" than file systems :O



--
Free Windows/PC help,
http://www.geocities.com/sheppola/trouble.html
email shepATpartyheld.de
Free songs download,
http://www.soundclick.com/bands/8/nomessiahsmusic.htm

w_tom wrote:

FAT16 was obsoleted by HPFS which in turn was obsoleted by
NTFS. FAT had numerous problems.

Such as?

--

Stacey