Should I use NTFS?

You'll probably have a new Hard drive by then anyway, maybe a new PC.
Here's a comparison of NTFS vs Fat32 vs Fat16
http://www.ntfs.com/ntfs_vs_fat.htm

NTFS is one of the main reasons for leaving 98 and moving on to XP...

I don't really understand your reasoning........... should you use NTFS, which may be obsolete in a few years, or should you use FAT32, which is already obsolete.

#3 by Wizop Koasati - 8/31/2004 8:54:36 PM
I don't really understand your reasoning........... should you use NTFS, which may be obsolete in a few years, or should you use FAT32, which is already obsolete.

I was hoping he'd figure that out from the comparo.

Also of note, Just because MS is working on releasing a new file system in the future, does not mean everyone has to run right out and swap over to it. Businesses are not going to want to try and convert thier datbases, files and Infrastructure data, over immediately...So why should you also? NTFS isn't going anywhere, anytime soon. Why worry over phantoms. NTFS is stable, secure and highly managable. It's moot question. you nothing to loose by Using NTFS, and Nothing to Gain By sticking to FAT16/ 32.

I'm running WinFS right now and its great.

Really!!!

Ok I'm joking. But if I wasn't I know I would like it.

If you're waiting for WinFS, you can keep waiting for many years to come. And I believe it's going to be layered on top of NTFS, so it won't really be a replacement, more an add-on.

For the average user, NTFS has no clear advantage over FAT32. More so for the power user though (to name a few: hard links, junction points, volume mounts and much faster defragmentation).

Beware converting to NTFS on a drive that already has WinXP installed. I tried that last night and it wouldn't boot.

bordfryr....I've installed XP a dozen or two times...each time on fat32 then converting to NTFS....never once a problem.....seems like operator error perhaps...

JAfo

Why would you install XP on Fat32 and then convert to NTFS.
Why not just format NTFS first. Thats what I always do.

But I also like to Pick up trash before I vacum the floor.
[Message Edited]

Life is simpler with fat32 if you wish to access the drive in dos...or through an alternate non-NT/XP system.....not needing third-party NTFS readers.

Often I may do data transfers outside the XP OS.....I have 2 caddies to alternately boot from.  When XP is installed and all is OK, then I convert.

This was also a legacy issue with Partitioners which didn't handle NTFS themselves....

Maybe I wasn't clear in my question, (I do realize NTFS to Fat32 is like a 7-Series Bimmer to an Escort). What I'm looking for is a comparison from individuals who've had an opportunity to work with both and relate the pros and cons of both file systems. I guess I'm trying to determine if NTFS has any real advantage for me beyond saying "yeah, I use it too."

Won't they both be compatable?? with each other?? they should.

If you have ever suffered data loss through cross-linked files after a system crash with a fat system then you won't ask the question a second time.

I repeat....NTFS is the single major advantage of using XP....

Not only that Jafo but the ability to set file level permissins also is a fine attribute. Fat is all or nothing shares. Also do not forget the smaller cluster sizes so end result is more usable space from a drive, with less wasted space in file overhead.

Here also is a no bones comparison.
http://cquirke.mvps.org/ntfs.htm

seems like operator error perhaps...

That's right, blame it on me!

If the only OS you will ever use is a Windows NT based system, then by all means you should switch to NTFS. But if you have or plan to install Linux as a dual boot option, your NTFS partition won't be recongnised by Linux. In that case, I recommend partitionning your disc where your Windows system and all your main Windows applications are on one NTFS partition and your documents, works, art, etc, are on a separate FAT32 partition. You can then install and run Linux on a third partition and still have access your all your documents in the FAT32 drive.

Note that I mentionned Linux, but it's also true if you want to install any non-NT based system (ex: Windows 98).

I have more dataloss on NTFS than I ever had on FAT and my machine doesn't even have to crash for it, so it's far from perfect.

Is Linux free?

Where could one find it or information about Linux online?

And last. What is the difference between Linux and Unix?

Unix is a proprietary Operating System, Linux was developped as an open source similar alternative to Unix and yes you can download for free. There are many flavours of Linux. The most popular ones being Red Hat, Mandrake and Suse.  It's a huge download though. You can buy them in a box for a reasonable prie (it's 4 or 5 CD's and includes hundreds of software).

Crae...I've never lost one byte within NTFS.....but fat crosslinked files occur almost anytime you BSOD in win 9x....

@creaonics...

If you have had many times dataloss with NTFS, then their is definitely something else very wrong with your system.

I work with WinNT since NT4 and i have never had any dataloss.