Author Topic: the return of fat???  (Read 2774 times)

daydreamer

  • Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 991
  • I also want a stargate
the return of fat???
« on: April 03, 2013, 06:22:43 AM »
I read that you use fat in new memorycard for phones and tablets, REALLY?, it sounds so return to stoneage computer format, mayb because of number of writes is lower compared to NTFS and newer formats?
Quote from Flashdance
Nick  :  When you give up your dream, you die
*wears a flameproof asbestos suit*
Gone serverside programming p:  :D
I love assembly,because its legal to write
princess:lea eax,luke
:)

dedndave

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8825
  • Still using Abacus 2.0
    • DednDave
Re: the return of fat???
« Reply #1 on: April 03, 2013, 09:10:02 AM »
for drives smaller than a certain size, FAT is a better format
what that size is depends on a lot of things
for a fast device, like RAM, it would probably be a larger value before it's advantageous to use NTFS

daydreamer

  • Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 991
  • I also want a stargate
Re: the return of fat???
« Reply #2 on: April 08, 2013, 03:19:12 AM »
for drives smaller than a certain size, FAT is a better format
what that size is depends on a lot of things
for a fast device, like RAM, it would probably be a larger value before it's advantageous to use NTFS
but I have 64gig+16gig internally, sounds like it should be better suited to NTFS or other more modern file system
Quote from Flashdance
Nick  :  When you give up your dream, you die
*wears a flameproof asbestos suit*
Gone serverside programming p:  :D
I love assembly,because its legal to write
princess:lea eax,luke
:)

dedndave

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8825
  • Still using Abacus 2.0
    • DednDave
Re: the return of fat???
« Reply #3 on: April 08, 2013, 03:41:29 AM »
maybe one of the other differences swayed their decision
there are many things that an NTFS system does that a FAT system doesn't
so, perhaps due to power consumption considerations, they chose FAT

one of the advantages of NTFS on physical drives is speed, of course
but, for memory-based storage, the difference probably isn't as noticable
it's fast, no matter which format is used   :P

sinsi

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1201
Re: the return of fat???
« Reply #4 on: April 08, 2013, 07:56:27 AM »
One problem with NTFS on a removable drive is that Windows keeps handles to metadata open which makes "safely remove" fail.
Usually the system process (PID 4) has open handles to $MFT and the like. Later Windows versions (XP SP2 and up) prefer exFAT,
although I'm not sure if Linux supports it.
I can walk on water but stagger on beer bourbon.