Which file system for XP (1 Viewer)

[Ammon]

The security, stability, and efficiency (as in used-vs-wasted data within blocks) is what makes NTFS superior to FAT32.

I agree with you that NTFS is technically a superior file system. But when it first came out, NTFS was the last thing you wanted on your Home PC. I should also add that NTFS happened to be a part of Windows NT, which was definately not a Home PC option. The changes from Windows NT to Windows 2000 did not seem like a huge improvement, which is why I havent touched it with a nine foot pole since then. We could also try comparing the Pentium chips to the AMD chips. Pentiums are definately rated to be superior to AMD's, however, I would take and AMD over a Pentium any day. Just because one thing has higher ratings and/or specs, doesnt necessarily mean its going to outperform the less of the two. NTFS has always been a problem for me for what I use it for.

 

[John_Berger]

Quote:

I have never bought the "Intel is superior" FUD that is put out anyway. When the Athon first came out, it ran circles around whatever the newest Pentium line was at the time, all the independent tests showed that, yet the Intel zealots still tried to convince everyone that Intel was faster. I give very little credibility to benchmarks that are used purely for marketing purposes as opposed to genuine knowledge.
Case in point (and this is completely true): IBM touts DB/2 as being faster than Oracle. Of course, everyone assumes that it's on IBM hardware because, after all, it's IBM. What's not told is that the benchmarks were performed on SUN servers because Sun's hardware gave better DB/2 performance than IBM's own hardware. So, yeah, DB/2 ran faster but the details on that benchmarks were hidden away. The Intel/AMD benchmarks are just about the same. They either don't give specs on the motherboard or they use motherboards that are specifically fine-tuned for the benchmark, thereby nullifying the validity of how fast the processor itself really is.
I buy AMD and only AMD. The cost/benefit ratio always whips Intel and I've never had a compatibility issue.

 

[Ammon]

Windows 2000 is vastly superior to Windows NT

Vastly is not the correct word. Windows 2000 pretty much destroyed Windows NT. Windows 2000 was a great gamers machine, you won't get any arguments from me there. I was talking the NTFS files system from NT to 2000.

I'm still waiting to get myself the Hammer!

 

[John_Berger]

Like anything else, (or everything else in Microsoft's case) they learn from the numerous mistake and bugs in NT and squashed them in 2000. You can't expect them to not improve NTFS from operating system version to operating system version. NTFS right here right now is an excellent PC file system in all aspects except compatibility when directly connected to 9x-based versions of Windows.

Agreed about Hammer. The Hammer could revolutionize PC computing and will leave anything that Intel can make in the dust.

 

[Ammon]

Microsoft has come along way since the initial release of NT. But NTFS still isnt up to par IMO of what I expect.

The best bug yet is the Windows XP bug that allows someone to create a hyperlink that will delete your Windows directory, or any other directory, when clicked on. They secretly fixed it in SP1.

 

[Phil Kim]

This thread is getting kinda silly. There really isn't anything wrong with the original NTFS as far as gaming experience is concerned (other than some incompatibility issues with legacy games).

It's the OS (NT 3.x to 4.0) that wasn't suitable for gaming. Windows 2000, a.k.a., NT 5.0, is more efficient at running games, but let's not blame NTFS.

That said, I agree with Ammon that NTFS (and NTFS 5 introduced on Windows 2000) is due for major change. Compared to file systems on some of the other OS, NTFS performance degrades noticeably on fragmented volume and missing many features (e.g., alias, case sensitive naming, more advanced free space management). Microsoft is supposedly working on a totally new file system.

 

[John_Berger]

...and missing many features (e.g., alias, case sensitive naming, more advanced free space management).

Then the person might as well just go straight to UNIX.

 

[MichaelG]

I just re-installed XP Pro for my home PC and I plan on setting up a RAID-0 with two 80gig partitions. I have one 100gig with a 20 gig partition for the OS and an 80gig. I haven't used this before but since it's an option in XP Pro I thought that I would try it out. I do plan on running a webserver and SQL Server. I might try a game or two but I am not really a gamer. I will be interested to see how this works for playing media out to my TV from this setup (ATI AIW 7500)

If I have problems or have a great experience I will post more later

 

[Phil Kim]

That's why we have { drum roll, please } DEFRAGMENTERS! Imagine that!

Defragmenting can be counterproductive. I find myself needing to defragment every 2 to 4 weeks (I do heavy software development work so the disk gets highly fragmented).

Ideally, I rather not defragment or just rarely (I defragment my notebook running Mac OS X just once every 6 months or so).

 

[Andre F]

I vote for NTFS!

 

[Colin Dunn]

One caveat if you choose NTFS: Make sure you install the Recovery Console on Windows 2000 or XP. To do this, mount your Win2K/XP CD, change to the I386 directory, and run the command:

WINNT32 /CMDCONS

This will install a recovery console that allows you to boot to a command line, log on as the local administrator, and work on an NTFS-based system drive without booting the full GUI.

This is very useful if you ever encounter OS/registry corruption. If you don't have the recovery console, and your OS won't boot even in safe mode, you have to do a "parallel install" (install Win2K/XP to a different subdirectory) in order to work the problem further.

And as for the MCSE: There were lots of training centers churning out NT 4 MCSEs by the truckload, but the Win2K MCSE is NOT as easily attained. Someone with 3 years of admin experience and a Win2K MCSE is probably the real deal. I hope that some day the MCSE will gain its former respectability, if for no other reason than I have spent the last several years working in the NT/Win2K space and would like to make a decent living...