Re: Suggestions for SATAII Hard drives

On Tue, 13 May 2008 14:53:12 +0100 'Seeker'
wrote this on alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.abit:

>
>"Andy" <1@2.3> wrote in message
>news:.. .
>> On Mon, 12 May 2008 14:15:29 +0100, "Seeker" <>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>
>>>Sorry I forget to mention.
>>>This will be my second hard drive.
>>>As my existing WinXP system disk is FAT32 I have to format this FAT32 too.
>> Wrong.
>>
>>>Also I need FAT32 for access over the network.
>> Also wrong.
>>
>>>
>>
>> ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **
>
>I have seen many comments that the file system type is not forward
>compatible,
>I quote from http://www.buildyourown.org.uk/pc-ar.../fdisk-format/
>
>"If you have the opportunity to select a system from these to format your
>Hard Disk, be aware that these system are not generally forwards-compatible.
>To clarify this, Operating Systems installed on Hard drives using FAT16 will
>not be able to access files on another Hard Drive (or partition) which has
>been formatted using FAT32 or NTFS.
>
>The same can be said for FAT32 and NTFS. However, FAT32 can read FAT16 and
>NTFS is clever enough to read both FAT16 and FAT32."
>
>So believing my FAT32 Win XP could not access NTFS partitions I assumed the
>same was true over the network.

That is all true afaik. NTFS is the way to go IMVHO.

On Tue, 13 May 2008 16:12:48 GMT, Wes Newell
<> wrote:

>So you can mix your winXP drives up with any file system it supports.
>Personally, I'd format the new drive with ntfs. Back up the fat32
>partitions to it and then reformat the main drive with ntfs, and copy it
>back. Fat32 is not designed for really large drives of today and is really
>wasteful of space using 32K blocks iirc. Thus using 32K of space minimum
>even for a 10 byte file or an extra 32K block for every file on the system
>that goes over the 32K boundary by just 1 byte. This means you are
>probably wasting 30-50% of your drive space that you could recoup by
>changing to ntfs.

I run XP and my backup drive is a 500GB drive formatted in FAT32.

The "FAT 32 wastes space" argument depends on the type of data you're
storing. Most people don't have an abundance of tiny files on their
system. A drive devoted to multimedia (or backups, as in my case)
would waste virtually no space.

FAT32 is the only choice if you plan on accessing the data via other
operating systems such as Linux, or if you plan on manipulating the
data using something like a DOS boot disk (which is why my backup
drive is FAT32... if I need to recover a blown drive, it's a lot
easier to restore from a FAT32 drive using low-level utilities).

And you can't "format the main drive in NTFS and copy back". That
just doesn't work for a boot drive. You *can* use XP's built in
"convert to NTFS" utility, but most people would advise against that
also.

The OP's system is running fine using FAT32 so why suggest he jump
through a bunch of hoops to get to NTFS?

On Tue, 13 May 2008 16:12:48 GMT 'Wes Newell'
wrote this on alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.abit:

>On Tue, 13 May 2008 14:53:12 +0100, Seeker wrote:
>
>> I have seen many comments that the file system type is not forward
>> compatible,
>> I quote from http://www.buildyourown.org.uk/pc-ar.../fdisk-format/
>>
>> "If you have the opportunity to select a system from these to format
>> your Hard Disk, be aware that these system are not generally
>> forwards-compatible. To clarify this, Operating Systems installed on
>> Hard drives using FAT16 will not be able to access files on another Hard
>> Drive (or partition) which has been formatted using FAT32 or NTFS.
>>
>> The same can be said for FAT32 and NTFS. However, FAT32 can read FAT16
>> and NTFS is clever enough to read both FAT16 and FAT32."
>>
>> So believing my FAT32 Win XP could not access NTFS partitions I assumed
>> the same was true over the network.


>None of this is true.

NTFS and FAT32 are backwards compatible.
They are not forward compatible.

You seem to have a problem understanding what the previous poster
was trying to explain.

On Tue, 13 May 2008 13:31:20 -0400, Folk wrote:

> On Tue, 13 May 2008 16:12:48 GMT, Wes Newell
> <> wrote:
>
>>So you can mix your winXP drives up with any file system it supports.
>>Personally, I'd format the new drive with ntfs. Back up the fat32
>>partitions to it and then reformat the main drive with ntfs, and copy it
>>back. Fat32 is not designed for really large drives of today and is
>>really wasteful of space using 32K blocks iirc. Thus using 32K of space
>>minimum even for a 10 byte file or an extra 32K block for every file on
>>the system that goes over the 32K boundary by just 1 byte. This means
>>you are probably wasting 30-50% of your drive space that you could
>>recoup by changing to ntfs.
>
> I run XP and my backup drive is a 500GB drive formatted in FAT32.
>
My backup is a JFS formatted raid0 pair of drives.

> The "FAT 32 wastes space" argument depends on the type of data you're
> storing. Most people don't have an abundance of tiny files on their
> system. A drive devoted to multimedia (or backups, as in my case) would
> waste virtually no space.
>
True, the larger the file, the less wasted space, but XP has thousands of
files. He's wasting lots of space with just the base install assuming it's
using 32K blocks.

> FAT32 is the only choice if you plan on accessing the data via other
> operating systems such as Linux, or if you plan on manipulating the data
> using something like a DOS boot disk (which is why my backup drive is
> FAT32... if I need to recover a blown drive, it's a lot easier to
> restore from a FAT32 drive using low-level utilities).
>
Well, I don't have that problem since I don't run MS OS's. And I could
read/write NTFS if I had an ntfs partition. :-)

> And you can't "format the main drive in NTFS and copy back". That just
> doesn't work for a boot drive. You *can* use XP's built in "convert to
> NTFS" utility, but most people would advise against that also.
>
So it's even easier than copying the system. BTW, I've copied windows
drives before and didn't have a problem getting them to boot.

> The OP's system is running fine using FAT32 so why suggest he jump
> through a bunch of hoops to get to NTFS?

Jump through what hoops? You just said XP will convert the system to NTFS
automatically.:-)




--
Want the ultimate in free OTA SD/HDTV Recorder? http://mythtv.org
My Tivo Experience http://wesnewell.no-ip.com/tivo.htm
Tivo HD/S3 compared http://wesnewell.no-ip.com/mythtivo.htm
AMD cpu help http://wesnewell.no-ip.com/cpu.php

On Tue, 13 May 2008 21:06:52 +0100, abit.user wrote:

> On Tue, 13 May 2008 16:12:48 GMT 'Wes Newell' wrote this on
> alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.abit:
>
>>On Tue, 13 May 2008 14:53:12 +0100, Seeker wrote:
>>
>>> I have seen many comments that the file system type is not forward
>>> compatible,
>>> I quote from http://www.buildyourown.org.uk/pc-ar.../fdisk-format/
>>>
>>> "If you have the opportunity to select a system from these to format
>>> your Hard Disk, be aware that these system are not generally
>>> forwards-compatible. To clarify this, Operating Systems installed on
>>> Hard drives using FAT16 will not be able to access files on another
>>> Hard Drive (or partition) which has been formatted using FAT32 or
>>> NTFS.
>>>
>>> The same can be said for FAT32 and NTFS. However, FAT32 can read FAT16
>>> and NTFS is clever enough to read both FAT16 and FAT32."
>>>
>>> So believing my FAT32 Win XP could not access NTFS partitions I
>>> assumed the same was true over the network.
>
>
>>None of this is true.
>
> NTFS and FAT32 are backwards compatible. They are not forward
> compatible.
>
> You seem to have a problem understanding what the previous poster was
> trying to explain.

I understand he's running XP, which supports both fat32 and ntfs. There's
nothing else to understand.

--
Want the ultimate in free OTA SD/HDTV Recorder? http://mythtv.org
My Tivo Experience http://wesnewell.no-ip.com/tivo.htm
Tivo HD/S3 compared http://wesnewell.no-ip.com/mythtivo.htm
AMD cpu help http://wesnewell.no-ip.com/cpu.php

On Tue, 13 May 2008 22:00:57 GMT 'Wes Newell'
wrote this on alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.abit:

>On Tue, 13 May 2008 21:06:52 +0100, abit.user wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 13 May 2008 16:12:48 GMT 'Wes Newell' wrote this on
>> alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.abit:
>>
>>>On Tue, 13 May 2008 14:53:12 +0100, Seeker wrote:
>>>
>>>> I have seen many comments that the file system type is not forward
>>>> compatible,
>>>> I quote from http://www.buildyourown.org.uk/pc-ar.../fdisk-format/
>>>>
>>>> "If you have the opportunity to select a system from these to format
>>>> your Hard Disk, be aware that these system are not generally
>>>> forwards-compatible. To clarify this, Operating Systems installed on
>>>> Hard drives using FAT16 will not be able to access files on another
>>>> Hard Drive (or partition) which has been formatted using FAT32 or
>>>> NTFS.
>>>>
>>>> The same can be said for FAT32 and NTFS. However, FAT32 can read FAT16
>>>> and NTFS is clever enough to read both FAT16 and FAT32."
>>>>
>>>> So believing my FAT32 Win XP could not access NTFS partitions I
>>>> assumed the same was true over the network.
>>
>>
>>>None of this is true.


>> NTFS and FAT32 are backwards compatible. They are not forward
>> compatible.
>>
>> You seem to have a problem understanding what the previous poster was
>> trying to explain.


>I understand he's running XP, which supports both fat32 and ntfs. There's
>nothing else to understand.

Wrong, again.

Seeker wrote:
"So believing my FAT32 Win XP could not access NTFS partitions..."

Which made your response wrong, as I alluded to, since it also
means that if he installs NTFS on his other drive, the FAT32 XP
system won't see it.

He could of course convert to NTFS on all of them.

Hope that clears it up...

On Tue, 13 May 2008 23:50:40 +0100, abit.user wrote:

> On Tue, 13 May 2008 22:00:57 GMT 'Wes Newell' wrote this on
> alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.abit:
>
>>On Tue, 13 May 2008 21:06:52 +0100, abit.user wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, 13 May 2008 16:12:48 GMT 'Wes Newell' wrote this on
>>> alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.abit:
>>>
>>>>On Tue, 13 May 2008 14:53:12 +0100, Seeker wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I have seen many comments that the file system type is not forward
>>>>> compatible,
>>>>> I quote from
>>>>> http://www.buildyourown.org.uk/pc-ar.../fdisk-format/
>>>>>
>>>>> "If you have the opportunity to select a system from these to format
>>>>> your Hard Disk, be aware that these system are not generally
>>>>> forwards-compatible. To clarify this, Operating Systems installed on
>>>>> Hard drives using FAT16 will not be able to access files on another
>>>>> Hard Drive (or partition) which has been formatted using FAT32 or
>>>>> NTFS.
>>>>>
>>>>> The same can be said for FAT32 and NTFS. However, FAT32 can read
>>>>> FAT16 and NTFS is clever enough to read both FAT16 and FAT32."
>>>>>
>>>>> So believing my FAT32 Win XP could not access NTFS partitions I
>>>>> assumed the same was true over the network.
>>>
>>>
>>>>None of this is true.
>
>
>>> NTFS and FAT32 are backwards compatible. They are not forward
>>> compatible.
>>>
>>> You seem to have a problem understanding what the previous poster was
>>> trying to explain.
>
>
>>I understand he's running XP, which supports both fat32 and ntfs.
>>There's nothing else to understand.
>
> Wrong, again.
>
> Seeker wrote:
> "So believing my FAT32 Win XP could not access NTFS partitions..."
>
> Which made your response wrong, as I alluded to, since it also means
> that if he installs NTFS on his other drive, the FAT32 XP system won't
> see it.
>
> He could of course convert to NTFS on all of them.
>
> Hope that clears it up...

So, you're saying win xp can't support both ntfs and fat 32 on the same
system? Somehow, even as bad a MS crap is, I find that hard to believe. In
fact I find it really stupid.

--
Want the ultimate in free OTA SD/HDTV Recorder? http://mythtv.org
My Tivo Experience http://wesnewell.no-ip.com/tivo.htm
Tivo HD/S3 compared http://wesnewell.no-ip.com/mythtivo.htm
AMD cpu help http://wesnewell.no-ip.com/cpu.php

On Wed, 14 May 2008 06:21:06 GMT 'Wes Newell'
wrote this on alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.abit:

>On Tue, 13 May 2008 23:50:40 +0100, abit.user wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 13 May 2008 22:00:57 GMT 'Wes Newell' wrote this on
>> alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.abit:
>>
>>>On Tue, 13 May 2008 21:06:52 +0100, abit.user wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Tue, 13 May 2008 16:12:48 GMT 'Wes Newell' wrote this on
>>>> alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.abit:
>>>>
>>>>>On Tue, 13 May 2008 14:53:12 +0100, Seeker wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I have seen many comments that the file system type is not forward
>>>>>> compatible,
>>>>>> I quote from
>>>>>> http://www.buildyourown.org.uk/pc-ar.../fdisk-format/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "If you have the opportunity to select a system from these to format
>>>>>> your Hard Disk, be aware that these system are not generally
>>>>>> forwards-compatible. To clarify this, Operating Systems installed on
>>>>>> Hard drives using FAT16 will not be able to access files on another
>>>>>> Hard Drive (or partition) which has been formatted using FAT32 or
>>>>>> NTFS.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The same can be said for FAT32 and NTFS. However, FAT32 can read
>>>>>> FAT16 and NTFS is clever enough to read both FAT16 and FAT32."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So believing my FAT32 Win XP could not access NTFS partitions I
>>>>>> assumed the same was true over the network.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>None of this is true.
>>
>>
>>>> NTFS and FAT32 are backwards compatible. They are not forward
>>>> compatible.
>>>>
>>>> You seem to have a problem understanding what the previous poster was
>>>> trying to explain.
>>
>>
>>>I understand he's running XP, which supports both fat32 and ntfs.
>>>There's nothing else to understand.
>>
>> Wrong, again.
>>
>> Seeker wrote:
>> "So believing my FAT32 Win XP could not access NTFS partitions..."
>>
>> Which made your response wrong, as I alluded to, since it also means
>> that if he installs NTFS on his other drive, the FAT32 XP system won't
>> see it.
>>
>> He could of course convert to NTFS on all of them.
>>
>> Hope that clears it up...
>
>So, you're saying win xp can't support both ntfs and fat 32 on the same
>system? Somehow, even as bad a MS crap is, I find that hard to believe. In
>fact I find it really stupid.

Nope. I simply said that FAT32 cannot access an NTFS drive.
The reason is that both are only backwards compatible, not
forwards compatible. Thus, NTFS being the most recent, it
can access a FAT32 drive but not the other way round.

Both can co-exist on the same system with that limitation.

That's quite well explained in various places.

On Wed, 14 May 2008 14:46:12 +0100 'Seeker'
wrote this on alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.abit:

>"abit.user" <> wrote in message
>news:de98e1f7fec662cb2ad51231a4a18ed5@localhost.1 27.0.0.1...
>>
>> On Wed, 14 May 2008 06:21:06 GMT 'Wes Newell'
>> wrote this on alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.abit:
>>
>>>On Tue, 13 May 2008 23:50:40 +0100, abit.user wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Tue, 13 May 2008 22:00:57 GMT 'Wes Newell' wrote this on
>>>> alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.abit:
>>>>
>>>>>On Tue, 13 May 2008 21:06:52 +0100, abit.user wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, 13 May 2008 16:12:48 GMT 'Wes Newell' wrote this on
>>>>>> alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.abit:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>On Tue, 13 May 2008 14:53:12 +0100, Seeker wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I have seen many comments that the file system type is not forward
>>>>>>>> compatible,
>>>>>>>> I quote from
>>>>>>>> http://www.buildyourown.org.uk/pc-ar.../fdisk-format/
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "If you have the opportunity to select a system from these to format
>>>>>>>> your Hard Disk, be aware that these system are not generally
>>>>>>>> forwards-compatible. To clarify this, Operating Systems installed on
>>>>>>>> Hard drives using FAT16 will not be able to access files on another
>>>>>>>> Hard Drive (or partition) which has been formatted using FAT32 or
>>>>>>>> NTFS.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The same can be said for FAT32 and NTFS. However, FAT32 can read
>>>>>>>> FAT16 and NTFS is clever enough to read both FAT16 and FAT32."
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So believing my FAT32 Win XP could not access NTFS partitions I
>>>>>>>> assumed the same was true over the network.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>None of this is true.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> NTFS and FAT32 are backwards compatible. They are not forward
>>>>>> compatible.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You seem to have a problem understanding what the previous poster was
>>>>>> trying to explain.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>I understand he's running XP, which supports both fat32 and ntfs.
>>>>>There's nothing else to understand.
>>>>
>>>> Wrong, again.
>>>>
>>>> Seeker wrote:
>>>> "So believing my FAT32 Win XP could not access NTFS partitions..."
>>>>
>>>> Which made your response wrong, as I alluded to, since it also means
>>>> that if he installs NTFS on his other drive, the FAT32 XP system won't
>>>> see it.
>>>>
>>>> He could of course convert to NTFS on all of them.
>>>>
>>>> Hope that clears it up...
>>>
>>>So, you're saying win xp can't support both ntfs and fat 32 on the same
>>>system? Somehow, even as bad a MS crap is, I find that hard to believe. In
>>>fact I find it really stupid.


>> Nope. I simply said that FAT32 cannot access an NTFS drive.
>> The reason is that both are only backwards compatible, not
>> forwards compatible. Thus, NTFS being the most recent, it
>> can access a FAT32 drive but not the other way round.
>>
>> Both can co-exist on the same system with that limitation.
>>
>> That's quite well explained in various places.
>
>So what is the chance of Windows Convert working on my XP Fat32 system disk.
>I was planning on a big partition and a smaller fat32 partition to try Linux
>on.
>I could back up onto the fat32 partition.

I've never used the Windows convert tool ( I've always used
XP with NTFS ) but MS provide it and presumably it works.
I wouldn't wish to use it without first backing up or imaging
my data! ...and doing a full defrag afterwards.

My general advice would be to always try to use NTFS since it's
a far better file system than FAT32 ... more robust, faster,
with additional features and can recognise larger partitions.

Depending how much free space you have on the FAT32, you could
consider partitioning it to create a second FAT32 partition for
Linux and then covert what's left to NTFS for XP.

On Wed, 14 May 2008 12:08:29 +0100, abit.user wrote:

> On Wed, 14 May 2008 06:21:06 GMT 'Wes Newell' wrote this on
>>So, you're saying win xp can't support both ntfs and fat 32 on the same
>>system? Somehow, even as bad a MS crap is, I find that hard to believe.
>>In fact I find it really stupid.
>
> Nope. I simply said that FAT32 cannot access an NTFS drive. The reason
> is that both are only backwards compatible, not forwards compatible.
> Thus, NTFS being the most recent, it can access a FAT32 drive but not
> the other way round.
>
> Both can co-exist on the same system with that limitation.
>
> That's quite well explained in various places.

To be honest, I don't think you have a clue what you are talking about.
File systems can't access other file systems. The OS and underlying
drivers are what access a file system. So it doesn't matter how many
different files systems you have as long as the OS you run has a driver
for it. I know I can access fat12, fat16, fat32, ntfs, hpfs, ext2/3,
reiser, xfs, jfs, and about 20-40 more different file systems. Running XP.
he could certainly format the new drive with NTFS and access it even
though XP is running off a fat32 formatted partition. It simply doesn't
matter. As for backups, he can back it up to any file system he wants.

--
Want the ultimate in free OTA SD/HDTV Recorder? http://mythtv.org
My Tivo Experience http://wesnewell.no-ip.com/tivo.htm
Tivo HD/S3 compared http://wesnewell.no-ip.com/mythtivo.htm
AMD cpu help http://wesnewell.no-ip.com/cpu.php