Windows 7 is NTFS right?

V

vitalym

Limp Gawd
Joined
Sep 12, 2008
Messages
295
Currently I have XP installed on my main drives, I shouldn't need to format my backup HDD that is NTFS, is that correct?

Is there any reason to format my backup drive under the Windows 7 install?
 
NTFS is the only thing Vista or 7 will install on (thank God). FAT died with XP. So yes, you don't really have a choice.
 
what was the new file system they were trying to work into vista but didn't make it?
it didn't make it into win7 either?
 
Arainach said:
No, but if they're 4GB or above I'd hope they're getting formatted in NTFS so you can store DVD images on them.
Click to expand...

or ExFAT which is FAT with support for 4gb+ files, etc.

NTFS is kind of a pain for removable drives, since you can have permissions issues, and getting it to eject took a couple tries last time i used it.
 
ambientZ said:
or ExFAT which is FAT with support for 4gb+ files, etc.

NTFS is kind of a pain for removable drives, since you can have permissions issues, and getting it to eject took a couple tries last time i used it.
Click to expand...

I've always been able to get around any permission issue, so hopefully that won't be an issue.
 
ambientZ said:
or ExFAT which is FAT with support for 4gb+ files, etc.

NTFS is kind of a pain for removable drives, since you can have permissions issues, and getting it to eject took a couple tries last time i used it.
Click to expand...


If you have permissions issues then you just need to learn how to modify the permissions and ownership.

FAT is nice on removable devices as it is more compatible with stuff like max, linux, etc.


tricky0502 said:
what was the new file system they were trying to work into vista but didn't make it?
it didn't make it into win7 either?
Click to expand...

Libraries in Win7 are what WinFS was going to be.
 
extide said:
If you have permissions issues then you just need to learn how to modify the permissions and ownership.

FAT is nice on removable devices as it is more compatible with stuff like max, linux, etc.
Click to expand...

Our school IT = stupid id10ts who don't know what they are doing, and are now 3 teams lacking a director (he fled!).

FAT is all I can use, because of that (permissions).

If a file is created by my account, then nobody else is able to modify it!

We end up with several working copies of a file, every project.

In the end we got kind of sick of it (and our school lost both computer labs), so some of us saved up for netbooks, instead (still saving...).
 
Jon55 said:
Sorry, should have been more specific. FAT has been dead with regards to OS's.
Click to expand...

FAT (or some later variant of it like FAT32) has held its place as an important filesystem for cross OS file transfers if you're multibooting with any version of Windows.
 
ryan_975 said:
FAT (or some later variant of it like FAT32) has held its place as an important filesystem for cross OS file transfers if you're multibooting with any version of Windows.
Click to expand...

It's been like 10 YEARS since an OS was released by MS that ONLY supported FAT/FAT32.

I can't wait until the EFAT or whatever it is that is supposed to be universal and support large files/etc to be become popular.
 
extide said:
It's been like 10 YEARS since an OS was released by MS that ONLY supported FAT/FAT32.

I can't wait until the EFAT or whatever it is that is supposed to be universal and support large files/etc to be become popular.
Click to expand...

MS is not the only OS developer. And NTFS write support for OS X and *nix is still not reliable.
 
I know, but you mentioned multibooting with versions of windows. As I said, it would be nice for ExFat to actually become prevalent...
 
extide said:
I know, but you mentioned multibooting with versions of windows. As I said, it would be nice for ExFat to actually become prevalent...
Click to expand...

No, I said multibooting with any version of Windows. I.E Linux + WinXP, or OS X + Vista. Because NTFS support in non-windows platforms is still incomplete, FAT(32) is still a popular filesystem, and thus is not dead.
 
ryan_975 said:
No, I said multibooting with any version of Windows. I.E Linux + WinXP, or OS X + Vista. Because NTFS support in non-windows platforms is still incomplete, FAT(32) is still a popular filesystem, and thus is not dead.
Click to expand...

Never said it was dead, although it is rather long in the tooth at this point, and there are better alternatives.
 
i thought, well originally (like, when windows XP first came out and they were just underway with longhorn development) that WinFS was going to be the new filesystem for vista. just like you see as 'libraries' in win7, all files were going to be pooled into grouped categories across all drives, no more seperate directories at all. however, the performance of this setup was never realized, and all that ever came of it was a crippled version of the 'real' WInFS- which is what we see as Libraries in win7 now. Libraries isnt that big of a deal really, i mean its useful but its hardly anything different then wmp music browser for desktop explorer.
 
krupted said:
i thought, well originally (like, when windows XP first came out and they were just underway with longhorn development) that WinFS was going to be the new filesystem for vista. just like you see as 'libraries' in win7, all files were going to be pooled into grouped categories across all drives, no more seperate directories at all. however, the performance of this setup was never realized, and all that ever came of it was a crippled version of the 'real' WInFS- which is what we see as Libraries in win7 now. Libraries isnt that big of a deal really, i mean its useful but its hardly anything different then wmp music browser for desktop explorer.
Click to expand...

WinFS was never going to be a new filesystem. It was a relational database layer between the filesystem and the user.
 
ryan_975 said:
WinFS was never going to be a new filesystem. It was a relational database layer between the filesystem and the user.
Click to expand...

Yeah it still ran on top of NTFS but it's point was to separate the actual file structure from how the data could be viewed.

With WinFS you were supposed to be able to have a single folder full of thousands of MP3's but VIEW it as if it was nested Genre\Artist\Album folder structure (or ANY other way you wanted).

It actually ran a special version of SQLServer (In windows vista beta builds there is actually the mssql sql server running if you looked in task manager), but at the time it proved to be too resource intensive for most peoples computers.

Now, you can actually achieve almost the same effect as WinFS was trying to achieve with using the windows search tool and then changing around the display options.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top