Reply

Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 9,614
Reputation: caperjack is a splendid one to behold caperjack is a splendid one to behold caperjack is a splendid one to behold caperjack is a splendid one to behold caperjack is a splendid one to behold caperjack is a splendid one to behold caperjack is a splendid one to behold 
Solved Threads: 498
Team Colleague
caperjack's Avatar
caperjack caperjack is offline Offline
Posting Prodigy

Re: FAT32 vs. NTFS

 
0
  #21
Mar 1st, 2004
Looks like I should have read these sites the other day Fat32
NTFS
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message  
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 2,414
Reputation: alc6379 has a spectacular aura about alc6379 has a spectacular aura about alc6379 has a spectacular aura about 
Solved Threads: 123
Team Colleague
alc6379's Avatar
alc6379 alc6379 is offline Offline
Cookie... That's it

Re: FAT32 vs. NTFS

 
0
  #22
Jul 5th, 2004
*bump*

Thought someone here could use this.
Keep in mind, that if you use NTFS, your recovery options will be SEVERELY limited in what you can do. You won't be able to use DOS, for one thing, to edit files, and make your system bootable again. What people fail to realize, though, is that NTFS was designed to be a government/industry-level secure filesystem. They probably intentionally designed it so you cannot access the filesystem in DOS.

It's kind of a balance. If you can forsee that something may go wrong with your system, and you might need access to your data outside of the OS, then you need to run FAT32. If you're more concerned about permissions and fault-tolerance than you are fixing things using DOS, then by all means run NTFS.
Alex Cavnar, aka alc6379
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message  
Reply

This thread is more than three months old.
Perhaps start a new thread instead?
Message:



Similar Threads
Other Threads in the Windows NT / 2000 / XP Forum
Thread Tools Search this Thread



About Us | Contact Us | Advertise | DaniWeb | Acceptable Use Policy | RSS Feed

©2003 - 2009 DaniWeb® LLC