Should I use NTFS?
Tuesday, August 31, 2004 by Stupendous Man | Discussion: WinCustomize Talk
I recently bought an 80G drive and one of the things I'm considering is switching to NTFS (which'll be obsolete in about 2 or 3 years when WinFS hits the market). Should I use NTFS or Just stick with Fat32? THanks all! 
 |
|
Page 3 of 4 | |
|
|---|
Jafo
Reply #42 Monday, September 6, 2004 5:49 AM
Reply #42 Monday, September 6, 2004 5:49 AM
Chas....no, the OS must be on Fat/Fat32.....but a drive formatted in NTFS can be read by it. Originally it was a one-way compatibility thing.....XP/NTFS could 'see' all that went before it, but not the other way round....
GreenReaper
Reply #43 Monday, September 6, 2004 10:52 AM
Reply #43 Monday, September 6, 2004 10:52 AM
I'd just like to clear up one misconception - NTFS will not be replaced by WinFS. WinFS will run on top of NTFS, either a current or future version. So you lose nothing by choosing NTFS now.
Ladysarajane
Reply #44 Monday, September 6, 2004 11:03 AM
Reply #44 Monday, September 6, 2004 11:03 AM
I have a dual boot system. My bios lets me choose which hard drive I want to boot from. My largest drive 120g is my NTFS partition. It is an eide drive and is configuared for cable select. I have that divided into XP partition(windows os) and a second partition to store documents and music etc in case XP crashes and needs reinstalled(so far I have never had to yet even after 2years). So That is drives C:\ and E:\ in NTFS. My second hard drive is smaller 20g and was from my old computer. That is in Fat32 and has my Win98 os on it. I use that one for games and other older applications that cannot play nice with XP 
. Especially dos games. That drive also has the jumper settings placed for cable select, and is on the same ide cable. I placed them on the cable for the master/slave configuration (XP master and 98 slave. That way if XP will boot up by default if I don't choose something.
NTFS is very stable with XP. I can see both drives with NTFS and Xp. That way I can back up documents etc to that drive as an extra backup.
When I boot to Win98, (Using my bios and selecting that hard drive to boot to)it only sees that drive that has the Win 98 os.
NTFS is the most stable, if you completely change the drive to NTFS format then install XP.
I hope that gives you info. Oh...The other piece of info is that NTFS works best on Hard drives that are bigger than 80g. If yours is smaller, than I would not change it. You would not see any benefit from it.
. Especially dos games. That drive also has the jumper settings placed for cable select, and is on the same ide cable. I placed them on the cable for the master/slave configuration (XP master and 98 slave. That way if XP will boot up by default if I don't choose something. NTFS is very stable with XP. I can see both drives with NTFS and Xp. That way I can back up documents etc to that drive as an extra backup.
When I boot to Win98, (Using my bios and selecting that hard drive to boot to)it only sees that drive that has the Win 98 os.
NTFS is the most stable, if you completely change the drive to NTFS format then install XP.
I hope that gives you info. Oh...The other piece of info is that NTFS works best on Hard drives that are bigger than 80g. If yours is smaller, than I would not change it. You would not see any benefit from it.
SelfExiled
Reply #45 Monday, September 6, 2004 3:36 PM
Reply #45 Monday, September 6, 2004 3:36 PM
Ladysarajane, that is exactly how I had my system set up to dual boot from the bios. But, now that I have a lot of Ram(1GB), it is impossible to use Win98.(I know Jafo, I'm looking for it) I just haven't found any advantages of using NTFS over Fat32 and a lot of disadvantages. Same with SP2, a lot of disadvantages and no real advantages.
Swedenskins
Reply #46 Monday, September 6, 2004 5:12 PM
Reply #46 Monday, September 6, 2004 5:12 PM
FAT32 or NTFS, it´s a big difference
Here´s a link to Microsoft´s infohttp://www.microsoft.com/WINDOWSXP/home/using/productdoc/en/choosing_between_NTFS_FAT_and_FAT32.asp?frame=true
Here´s a link to Microsoft´s infohttp://www.microsoft.com/WINDOWSXP/home/using/productdoc/en/choosing_between_NTFS_FAT_and_FAT32.asp?frame=true
Ladysarajane
Reply #47 Monday, September 6, 2004 10:53 PM
Reply #47 Monday, September 6, 2004 10:53 PM
I wish I could afford the 1GB ram. I do a lot of photo editing. I only have 512 now and with everyday tasks I use about 75% of it. I'm willing to give up Win98 for it!
I thought that was the easiest way to have 2 computers on one and not mess with a boot manager. I had a video card driver conflict, (XP and it did not get along) and it seemed to me that the NTFS XP recovers faster.
I've been lucky. I have had no problems with SP2. If I have to use IE for certain sites, at least now there is a popup blocker, and I can get to the firewall setting faster, but otherwise no real difference good or bad from me.
I just remember to disable any startup programs from activating(Like Bootskin and windowblinds) and set them back to defaults, install sp2. Reboot the first time(It takes it forever!) then a second time then enable my programs to start up. I have had no problems with it.
I thought that was the easiest way to have 2 computers on one and not mess with a boot manager. I had a video card driver conflict, (XP and it did not get along) and it seemed to me that the NTFS XP recovers faster.
I've been lucky. I have had no problems with SP2. If I have to use IE for certain sites, at least now there is a popup blocker, and I can get to the firewall setting faster, but otherwise no real difference good or bad from me.
I just remember to disable any startup programs from activating(Like Bootskin and windowblinds) and set them back to defaults, install sp2. Reboot the first time(It takes it forever!) then a second time then enable my programs to start up. I have had no problems with it.
SelfExiled
Reply #48 Tuesday, September 7, 2004 1:41 AM
Reply #48 Tuesday, September 7, 2004 1:41 AM
Good SP2 installation procedure, Ladysarajane. Less people would probably have problems if they followed that procedure.
smoke-tetsu
Reply #49 Tuesday, September 7, 2004 3:42 AM
Reply #49 Tuesday, September 7, 2004 3:42 AM
I myself have found NTFS much more fault tolerant than FAT32. For example I have a visual chat server and I have noticed how on FAT32 if there is say a power failure and my computer is improperly shut down the avatar storage file gets corrupted and I have to restore it from a backup. But with NTFS that doesn't happen so I don't have to go through that.
I also like file permissions which I make good use of having my user account as power user and using cygwin to manage it.
I have also been able to access the drive just fine using some linux distributions. But if you want to install alternative OS' that install on the same partition as windows like some QNX, BeOS, Winlinux, etc. then you need to be using FAT32. But other than that I don't see any reason not to use NTFS if you are on a NT based system like XP.
I haven't had a single program not work that worked before due to me using NTFS. Also I would never install win9x on my PC so I myself don't care if it can read a NTFS drive, though if you have a 98 PC on your network it don't matter it still can read shares on your NTFS drive.
[Message Edited]
I also like file permissions which I make good use of having my user account as power user and using cygwin to manage it.
I have also been able to access the drive just fine using some linux distributions. But if you want to install alternative OS' that install on the same partition as windows like some QNX, BeOS, Winlinux, etc. then you need to be using FAT32. But other than that I don't see any reason not to use NTFS if you are on a NT based system like XP.
I haven't had a single program not work that worked before due to me using NTFS. Also I would never install win9x on my PC so I myself don't care if it can read a NTFS drive, though if you have a 98 PC on your network it don't matter it still can read shares on your NTFS drive.
[Message Edited]
kona0197
Reply #50 Tuesday, September 7, 2004 9:40 AM
Reply #50 Tuesday, September 7, 2004 9:40 AM
Ladysarajane - A motherboard with Dual Channel memory might help. It has in my situation. I have 512 megs as well.
Koasati
Reply #51 Tuesday, September 7, 2004 2:36 PM
Reply #51 Tuesday, September 7, 2004 2:36 PM
No WinFS For LongHorn
The Microsoft Watch site (a good one I might add) reported that Redmond announced that it is cutting some of its planned Longhorn features in order to get the desktop version of the product out the door by 2006. The Windows File System (WinFS) — technology that was set to simplify information storage and retrieval — won't make it into the final, shipping versions of Longhorn client, company officials confirmed. WinFS also won't be part of Longhorn server, the server complement of Longhorn that is still due out in 2007, as Microsoft announced earlier this year.
Company officials said they were not sure when and via what version of Windows Microsoft ultimately will make WinFS available. Microsoft has talked about Blackcomb versions of Windows as the next major follow-ons to Longhorn. But they aren't expected to ship until the end of this decade. The full article is here:
http://www.w2knews.com/rd/rd.cfm?id=040906RN-WinFS
And here is a full interview with Gates, going into the nitty gritty:http://www.w2knews.com/rd/rd.cfm?id=040906RN-Gates
I just received this in an email, and thought I'd share it.
PurrBall
Reply #52 Tuesday, September 7, 2004 2:52 PM
Reply #52 Tuesday, September 7, 2004 2:52 PM
If you use FAT, than you have a fat chance of being uncompatabe. NTFS is more efficient, and is good for home use (i.e skinning using internet using word playing games not using 2 oses).
Ladysarajane
Reply #53 Tuesday, September 7, 2004 11:07 PM
Oh Kona0197, I wish I could afford a new motherboard, but I currently am stuck with my M830L aka K7S5A. It is now known to have weird "quirks". Such as booting up and It cannot find the first hard drive and boots into Win98(my second hard drive). The second is sometimes it loses the CMOS (the batteries are good!). The third and my favorite is ....The Date is Jan 1, 1601 !!! It is quite the time traveler.
Luckily, a company helped me with an updated bios so the situation only occurs once a month now. It's like a lottery at our house to see when it will misbehave and how!!!
But seriously, I have a chronic illness and disability doesn't pay much, not to mention how much my medicines cost. So getting my motherboard last as long as possible is what I strive for.
Back to the Thread! I myself would recommend NTFS for everybody that is just using XP. I keep Win98 for certain games, that I cannot get to run on XP(yes, I tried compatiablity mode) and one other application that cannot play nice with XP. I believe NTFS is a more stable file system and recovers slight faster with less file fragmentation. In Win98 I defrag about every month, with XP it is about every 4-5months.
Reply #53 Tuesday, September 7, 2004 11:07 PM
Oh Kona0197, I wish I could afford a new motherboard, but I currently am stuck with my M830L aka K7S5A. It is now known to have weird "quirks". Such as booting up and It cannot find the first hard drive and boots into Win98(my second hard drive). The second is sometimes it loses the CMOS (the batteries are good!). The third and my favorite is ....The Date is Jan 1, 1601 !!! It is quite the time traveler.
Luckily, a company helped me with an updated bios so the situation only occurs once a month now. It's like a lottery at our house to see when it will misbehave and how!!!
But seriously, I have a chronic illness and disability doesn't pay much, not to mention how much my medicines cost. So getting my motherboard last as long as possible is what I strive for.
Back to the Thread! I myself would recommend NTFS for everybody that is just using XP. I keep Win98 for certain games, that I cannot get to run on XP(yes, I tried compatiablity mode) and one other application that cannot play nice with XP. I believe NTFS is a more stable file system and recovers slight faster with less file fragmentation. In Win98 I defrag about every month, with XP it is about every 4-5months.
kona0197
Reply #54 Wednesday, September 8, 2004 10:58 AM
Reply #54 Wednesday, September 8, 2004 10:58 AM
Ladysarajane - Email me please. I might be able to help you out.
bordfryr
Reply #56 Thursday, September 9, 2004 5:02 AM
Reply #56 Thursday, September 9, 2004 5:02 AM
I am still having a problem getting NTFS to work on my Maxtor 120GB drive. I have installed this on a 60 and 13Gb drives and it works fine.
I upgraded the 120 (to NTFS) and it wouldn't boot. I did a clean install (after wiping the drive 3 times using Drivecleanser and doing a low-level) and it still wouldn't boot. Got an Unmountable Boot Volume BSOD. What am I missing here?
Could the drive be defective? I have run several utilities, scandisk, Drive Fitness Test, etc. and everything checks out fine. I reformatted and installed using Fat32 and it works fine.???????
I upgraded the 120 (to NTFS) and it wouldn't boot. I did a clean install (after wiping the drive 3 times using Drivecleanser and doing a low-level) and it still wouldn't boot. Got an Unmountable Boot Volume BSOD. What am I missing here?
Could the drive be defective? I have run several utilities, scandisk, Drive Fitness Test, etc. and everything checks out fine. I reformatted and installed using Fat32 and it works fine.???????
Ladysarajane
Reply #57 Thursday, September 9, 2004 12:47 PM
Reply #57 Thursday, September 9, 2004 12:47 PM
When you installed the drive, did you use the 80wire, 40pin connector that came with it or an older cable that is the 40wire connector? Also double check your Bios settings to make sure that the UDMA modes are set to the faster setting. Also what exactly was the second parameter on the stop error?
STOP 0x000000ED (0x aaaaaaaa ,0x bbbbbbbb ,0x cccccccc ,0x dddddddd ) UNMOUNTABLE_BOOT_VOLUME
The Oxbbbbbbbb one. If it Ox C0000032, then the file system is also damaged.
My guess is the ide cable is the incorrect or damaged one and it damaged the file system(NTFS) for XP. I believe the hard drive is fine.
STOP 0x000000ED (0x aaaaaaaa ,0x bbbbbbbb ,0x cccccccc ,0x dddddddd ) UNMOUNTABLE_BOOT_VOLUME
The Oxbbbbbbbb one. If it Ox C0000032, then the file system is also damaged.
My guess is the ide cable is the incorrect or damaged one and it damaged the file system(NTFS) for XP. I believe the hard drive is fine.
bordfryr
Reply #59 Thursday, September 9, 2004 7:16 PM
Reply #59 Thursday, September 9, 2004 7:16 PM
The cable sounds like that might have been the problem. I didn't know the IDE cable could damage a file system. Yikes!
I might just try that again this weekend. Thanks Ladysarajane.
(I didn't write the numbers down on the stop error.)
I might just try that again this weekend. Thanks Ladysarajane.
(I didn't write the numbers down on the stop error.)
Ladysarajane
Reply #60 Friday, September 10, 2004 12:14 AM
Reply #60 Friday, September 10, 2004 12:14 AM
Your welcome!
If you still have Xp fat32 on the drive, replace the cable then try booting to XP to make sure the cable is on correctly. Then try formating it using NTFS. It may still have the error if the MBR file system is already damaged. I'll check back here this weekend to see if you need help because there is a way to fix it if it does have the error.(it should be the one I listed up above). If not then write down the new error code and I will see if I can help you with that one.
If you still have Xp fat32 on the drive, replace the cable then try booting to XP to make sure the cable is on correctly. Then try formating it using NTFS. It may still have the error if the MBR file system is already damaged. I'll check back here this weekend to see if you need help because there is a way to fix it if it does have the error.(it should be the one I listed up above). If not then write down the new error code and I will see if I can help you with that one.
Please login to comment and/or vote for this skin.
Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
- Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums and downloading skins.
- Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
- Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
- It's simple, and FREE!
|
|
Page 3 of 4 | |
|
|---|
Reply #41 Monday, September 6, 2004 3:01 AM
[Message Edited]