Re: XP and NTFS

in my opinion,
all systems should use ntfs. i dont think twice about it now!

there is no reason not to. no significant downside.
the big benefit is a more stable disk structure.
if you crash a fat32 system, you have a greater chance of corrupting your operating system than if you crash under ntfs.


Bill wrote: 
I did not use the NTSF option when I installed XP.  (Either I didn't
see it come up during installation or I slept through it.)  What
advantages would I gain from making the conversion now?

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: XP SP2 ntfs.sys question
    ... but system and/or ntfs.sys didn't crash until start-up. ... What happend ... My system volume was ntfs, and I could not boot even the ... Recovery Console or Setup because they require ntfs.sys to load. ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.general)
  • Re: XP and NTFS
    ... >> the big benefit is a more stable disk structure. ... >> if you crash a fat32 system, you have a greater chance of corrupting ... >> your operating system than if you crash under ntfs. ... it can be a lot harder to recover data from an NTFS ...
    (alt.sys.pc-clone.dell)
  • Re: XP and NTFS
    ... no significant downside. ... if you crash a fat32 system, you have a greater chance of corrupting your operating system than if you crash under ntfs. ... If you're working in a mixed environment, say you dual boot with Linux, then having FAT32 partition helps when you want to swap media between the two. ...
    (alt.sys.pc-clone.dell)
  • [PATCH 13/13] NTFS: Critical bug fix (affects MIPS and possibly others)
    ... It fixes a crash in NTFS on architectures where flush_dcache_page ... is a real function. ...
    (Linux-Kernel)
  • [PATCH 12/25] NTFS: Critical bug fix (affects MIPS and possibly others)
    ... It fixes a crash in NTFS on architectures where flush_dcache_page ... is a real function. ...
    (Linux-Kernel)