[<<]Message[>>]    [<<]Author[>>]    [<<]Subject[>>]    [<<]Thread[>>]

Number   :  5207
Date     :  2003-08-04
Author   :  Garry Deane
Subject  :  Re: once more: ntfs vs fat32
Size(KB) :  1


--- In xxcopy@yahoogroups.com, "Virg"  wrote:
> Thanks, Garry.
> That makes a lot of sense. Either direction between two
> computers with different operating systems. My cousin has
> all his data backed up on an ntfs drive. Was thinking of
> reverting to win98 SE but I figured he wouldn't be able to
> access his data backups. He'll stick with XP for now but
> the ntfs access program on the site you cited seems promising.
> Is there any particular reason not to change his second hard
> drive to fat32 once he's restored his backups? Then future
> backups would be accessible by either os.

I'm not aware of any drawbacks to using FAT32 on XP other than
slightly better efficiency with NTFS and the security and 
auditing settings that can be applied to NTFS volumes. The
latter is largely irrelevant in a stand alone environment. The
advantages of using FAT32 that can be read/written by both W98
and XP would far outweigh any disadvantages.

I'd suggest that you install W98 as a dual boot option then you
can boot into either W98 or XP as needed. This would however
require that your boot partition is formatted as FAT16 (4Gb max)
or FAT32.

Garry



This message if part of XXCOPY's message Archive.
The archive contains all the messages posted at Yahoo!Groups: XXCOPY.