[Thinkpad] file systems (was T43)

[Haudy Kazemi]

On Oct 9 2006, STeve Andre' wrote:

>On Monday 09 October 2006 16:31, Michael Geary wrote:
>> > Without getting into an OT war on this, there are certainly
>> > some valid reasons to prefer Fat32 on a partition instead of
>> > NTFS.  I had a series of system crashes with NTFS systems a
>> > couple of years ago (on 2 different machines), and system
>> > attempts to automatically repair the directory structure
>> > munged everything so badly that none of my recovery utilities
>> > could do anything.  I now keep the main Windows partition
>> > small and FAT32, and the remainder of the system NTFS - this
>> > gives me the security and random-access-speed advantages of
>> > NTFS, and the simplicity of FAT32 for basic system stuff (as
>> > well as a platform for multi-booting into DOS to run some
>> > very old software I need that will not run in a DOS window).
>>
>> Using FAT32 does allow you to use recovery utilities that do not 
>> understand NTFS.
>>
>> BUT... It makes it *MUCH* more likely that you will need to use those
>> recovery utilities. NTFS is in a completely different league than FAT32
>> when it comes to robustness.
>>
>> Not a tradeoff I'd be willing to make, but YMMV.
>>
>> For running that old DOS software, VMware is the best solution. You can 
>> create a DOS VM that lets you actually run DOS in its own virtual 
>> machine. No rebooting required. You can use the free VMware player - let 
>> me know if you'd like a blank VM image ready to install DOS in.
>>
>> -Mike

Or use the open source DOSBox or Microsoft's VirtualPC. From the website: 
"DOSBox is a DOS-emulator that uses the SDL-library which makes DOSBox very 
easy to port to different platforms. DOSBox has already been ported to many 
different platforms, such as Windows, BeOS, Linux, MacOS X...

DOSBox also emulates CPU:286/386 realmode/protected mode, Directory 
FileSystem/XMS/EMS, Tandy/Hercules/CGA/EGA/VGA/VESA graphics, a 
SoundBlaster/Gravis Ultra Sound card for excellent sound compatibility with 
older games..." http://dosbox.sourceforge.net

<snip>

>One big reason to use FAT32: you can stare at the disk when something
>causes Windows to choke on boot up, if you have a Win98 boot disk
>lying around.  I once had a user who desperately needed to see some
>files on his laptop which stopped booting correctly.  I was able to help
>him after he found a win98 disk.  I know there are tools now to get you
>look at an NTFS disk, but in an emergency, most people do not have
>access to them.
>
>Is that a valid reason to stick with FAT32?  Probably not, for most people.
>But it is something to think about.
>
>--STeve Andre'

When NTFS first came out I stuck with FAT32 because the data recovery tools 
(undelete, etc.) then available could not handle NTFS. Since then, many of 
them have added NTFS support, and tools like NTFSDOS ( 
http://www.sysinternals.com/Utilities/NtfsDos.html ) or readntfs.exe ( 
http://www.ntfs.com/products.htm ) or NTFS4DOS ( 
http://www.datapol.de/dpe/recovery/ntfs/index.html ) make DOS boot disk 
command line access of an NTFS partition possible (some of these tools are 
read-only or the free versions are read-only).

To top it off, many of the bootable live CD Linux distros can read (and 
some can write) NTFS partitions. (See Knoppix 
http://www.knopper.net/knoppix/index-en.html )

With all of these tools available, I'm comfortable enough using NTFS that I 
only use FAT32 when I must have a shared read/write from DOS partition, 
without using additional drivers. I wouldn't install my primary OS on NTFS 
anymore, but I might keep a small FAT32 partition around for tiny emergency 
system maintence tools or for file exchange on a DOS dual boot system.

-hk