Fat32 or NTFS

[NeedHelp]

Should i even bother converting to NTFS ? or should i stay with fat32.....what exactly would the change do?

[ngc4414]

what os are you running? you can only get ntfs with xp, 2000, 2003, and nt. ntfs would allow security features, a little faster, a little more efficant and allows for larger disks

[ngc4414]

check out these theads which deal with the same subject dude:

http://forums.windrivers.com/showthread.php?t=54236
http://forums.windrivers.com/showthread.php?t=39680
http://forums.windrivers.com/showthread.php?t=30643
http://forums.windrivers.com/showthread.php?t=25507

[TechZ]

Like ngc4414 says, we need to know what OS you are running. NTFS is definately better when running WinXP/2000. Its what it was designed to use. So why not use it. the arguments have been carried out in the threads mentioned above, so we might as well not get into it here.

[TripleRLtd]

So why not use it. the arguments have been carried out in the threads mentioned above, so we might as well not get into it here.Not so fast. The "arguments" do serve a purpose. And, confus-ed would definitely disagree with you on your point. And, after thinking about this for a long time, I think he may have convinced me, too.
For home users: fat32
Business with SECURITY needs: ntfs.
So: lets start the debate.
http://forums.windrivers.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

[ngc4414]

but ntfs yields preformance gains, and every home user wants a faster computer

[Matridom]

NTFS is more efficient on larger disks, less slack space better security REGARDLESS of wether its going to be used or not. On small disks fat is better large, NTFS.

[TechZ]

We then need to define small hd, and large hd. In todays world, even regular PC's come with 40gb HDD.

[Spork]

We then need to define small hd, and large hd. In todays world, even regular PC's come with 40gb HDD.

In my opinion, anything larger than 20GB should be NTFS formatted.

[Matridom]

In my opinion, anything larger than 20GB should be NTFS formatted.

I'll agree with spork here.. but i'll go by what MS suggests, 36 gig i think it is and xp won't format fat?

[TechZ]

Well then in general, most computers today and for the last 2 years or so should go NTFS format for their HD.

[Spork]

I'll agree with spork here.. but i'll go by what MS suggests, 36 gig i think it is and xp won't format fat?

XP won't format fat? Am I reading that correctly..? During the XP install, you have the option of formatting your HD with either NTFS or FAT32.

[Ya_know]

XP won't format fat? Am I reading that correctly..? During the XP install, you have the option of formatting your HD with either NTFS or FAT32.

Only up to a certain partition size--32 gig. After that, you are only offered the option to format NTFS...you would have to go in and delete and recreate the partition to be smaller than 32 Gig to have that option back.

[kato2274]

I used to say home users fat32 just because it was easier to recover files, or delete the SAM if they forgot their admin password etc.

now with bartpe boot disk, I just format everthing NTFS because I can read and write NTFS partitions with that great little CD.

[NeedHelp]

alright so ive looked at both fat32 and ntfs..... and ive decided to go with ntfs, how might i convert my fat32 system to ntfs without losing any of my files ( over 21 gigs of music )

[TechZ]

http://www.ntfs.com/quest3.htm

Seems the most popular solution, though I've always used Partition Magic.

[NeedHelp]

wow lol that faq was perfect, it exactly answered my question good look man

[CrashNBurn79]

Go to the Command Prompt by going to run and typing in CMD

There you type in convert followed by the usage listed below:

CONVERT volume /FS:NTFS [/V] [/CvtArea:filename] [/NoSecurity] [/X]

volume Specifies the drive letter (followed by a colon),
mount point, or volume name.
/FS:NTFS Specifies that the volume is to be converted to NTFS.
/V Specifies that Convert should be run in verbose mode.
/CvtArea:filename
Specifies a contiguous file in the root directory to be
the place holder for NTFS system files.
/NoSecurity Specifies the converted files and directories security
settings to be accessible by everyone.
/X Forces the volume to dismount first if necessary.
All opened handles to the volume would then be invalid.

I.E. if you were converting C drive to NTFS you would type this in:
convert c: /FS:NTFS

Then it will tell you it will run at next reboot, so you exit that then reboot, the rest is automated.

[confus-ed]

Go to the Command Prompt by going to run and typing in CMD

There you type in convert followed by the usage listed below:

CONVERT volume /FS:NTFS [/V] [/CvtArea:filename] [/NoSecurity] [/X]...

Convert is all vey well for this but ...
If you use the Convert utility to convert a volume from FAT to NTFS, Windows always uses a 512-byte cluster size. FAT structures are aligned on 512-byte boundaries; a larger cluster size does not allow conversion. Note also that in Microsoft Windows NT 4.0 and earlier, when a partition is formatted under Windows Setup, the partition is first formatted as FAT and then converted to NTFS. Therefore the cluster size is always 512 bytes when a partition is formatted in Setup.
from here (http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=314878)

& usually formatting with NTFS results in a cluster size of 4k which is better 'generally', but you have to understand all about, 'slack' & how MFT style fetches work as opposed to FAT sytle ones to get 'why' - the decision over file systems 'bestness' being way beyond most users thoughts or abilities ;) - but believe me when I tell you - doing a clean format instead of using convert will produce much better results ! else all those iddy biddy sectors are gonna give you piss poor performance generally ;)

[Martin009]

Also, could any one tell me if there would be stability issues if for instance, I have a 40 gig hard drive with Windows XP Home Edition and am using Fat32. The above posts seem to think that it is not possible and yet this is what I have.

[Martin009]

And if you were to convert as the threads above indicate what are the possibilities and risks of loosing all your data?

[kato2274]

Also, could any one tell me if there would be stability issues if for instance, I have a 40 gig hard drive with Windows XP Home Edition and am using Fat32. The above posts seem to think that it is not possible and yet this is what I have.
it's entirely possible. you just can't format a disk from within windows computer management and have a partition over 32GB. it's quite possible using either the manufactures disk or something like partition magic.

[confus-ed]

Its worth knowing btw that the MFT in NTFS will use approx 1/8th of your disk space for the 'MFT reserve zone' & if this gets fragmented (as its like all things in NFTS a file itself) you are gonna get poor performance !

To defragment an MFT you need a third party utility or to do a full backup & restore to rebuild a fresh MFT, which with NTFS is advisable periodically as there is no mechanism for the MFT to shrink within xp/2000 (well any NTFS based o/s) & this is definately a weakness (think about your average home users installing & de-installing - I found an MFT yesterday with 300,000+ entries in it using 35% of the disk !) & MS need to fix up defrag so it can defrag this important file & rebuild it as a maintenance operation, without the poor old user having to pay for it !

[TechZ]

ATM I use Diskeeper and it defrags the MFT as well as resizes it based on required space.

[confus-ed]

ATM I use Diskeeper and it defrags the MFT as well as resizes it based on required space.

There's other things (besides diskeeper) that can defragment the MFT itself or use different sizes of MFT reserve zone (there's a registry tweak that you can set anyway) , BUT NOTHING can make your MFT shrink in files used terms (look at the defrag report carefully & you'll see it tells you how many files are present & then compare that to the number of files present on your machine & over time the disparity gets greater & greater ;)) The only practical way I know to sort this out (you want this list as short as possible as its what it has to read every time it wants a file) is to do a full backup & restore - & in 'operating system terms' this is just plain pooh ! :eek2:

NTFS requires 'management' whatever Billy has to say about matters, & its why I stick with the line of NTFS for anyone who cares about permissions 'really' (i.e. business) & FAT for those that don't (home users) ;)

[TripleRLtd]

NTFS requires 'management' whatever Billy has to say about matters, & its why I stick with the line of NTFS for anyone who cares about permissions 'really' (i.e. business) & FAT for those that don't (home users) ;)Well, it's about time you popped in to defend your long time stance.http://forums.windrivers.com/images/smilies/tongue.gif
Welcome back -ed. http://forums.windrivers.com/images/smilies/thumbs.gif

[confus-ed]

Fat can be yummy (http://www.hundertprozentig.net/gifsbuttons/Gemeinsame%20Dokumente/butter.jpg) or NOT (http://www.saintsforever.com/fat.JPG) ! :devil:

Not worksafe, nor family friendly links ! :eek2: