FAT32 or NTFS? - GoFuckYourself.com

Jace · 07-14-2004, 08:49 AM

well?

Adultnet · 07-14-2004, 08:55 AM

NTFS is much better then fat32 since ntfs is the New Technology file system that Microsoft have developed it is faster, has much more security features and allows to apply security settings per file which is not possible on fat32.

censored · 07-14-2004, 09:00 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Adultnet
NTFS is much better then fat32 since ntfs is the New Technology file system that Microsoft have developed it is faster, has much more security features and allows to apply security settings per file which is not possible on fat32.

absolutely agree.. NTFS da rulez

machinegunkelly · 07-14-2004, 09:01 AM

Last time I installed my XP I did Fat32 and my PC ran like utter shit after a few weeks ,

NTFS seems more stable on this install .

Adultnet · 07-14-2004, 09:05 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by machinegunkelly
Last time I installed my XP I did Fat32 and my PC ran like utter shit after a few weeks ,

NTFS seems more stable on this install .

NTFS is much more stable then fat anyways if you have windows xp and want to convert a hard drive from ntfs to fat you can use the convert command at msdos.

macho · 07-14-2004, 09:57 AM

I guess NTFS is better. I use it!

sandman! · 07-14-2004, 10:01 AM

you would have to be an idiot to install fat32.

EnigmaTek · 07-14-2004, 10:01 AM

NTFS is better because you can decide how big you want your hard drive sectors to be. This can give you a lot more usable space on your hard drive versus FAT16 and FAT32.

TheSwed · 07-14-2004, 10:02 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Adultnet
NTFS is much better then fat32 since ntfs is the New Technology file system that Microsoft have developed it is faster, has much more security features and allows to apply security settings per file which is not possible on fat32.

agree

sexyclicks · 07-14-2004, 10:02 AM

NTFS is phat

Dildozer · 07-14-2004, 10:03 AM

Weird last time i installed it never gave me the fat32 option

machinegunkelly · 07-14-2004, 10:04 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by sandman!
you would have to be an idiot to install fat32.

Or misinformed .
Not everyone is an MSCE ya know ;)

fishy · 07-14-2004, 10:05 AM

Yeah, NTFS is better. The only problem is that I keep my windoze installation kit on my hard drive (I hate installing it from a CD), so if there's a problem and I have to reinstall windoze, I have to do this within a MSDOS session, and MSDOS don't recognize NTFS, so I'm in deep shit. That happened to me a couple of times, and from then on FAT32 is the anwer for me... Pretty dumb, huh?

Vitasoy · 07-14-2004, 11:04 AM

NTFS will save more space, but if you plan on installing an OS like win98 then you need fat32.

mattyboy · 07-14-2004, 11:28 AM

I'm pretty sure that FAT 32 doesn't handle files over 4 (or 5??) GB.

Adultnet · 07-14-2004, 11:31 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by mattyboy
I'm pretty sure that FAT 32 doesn't handle files over 4 (or 5??) GB.

Fat32 can handle large files ...

SinisterStudios · 07-14-2004, 12:15 PM

F the microcrap stuff and go with the penguin, linux is a much better os and works well on the desktop if you have the time to make it all work. Otherwise NTFS cant be beat

sandman! · 07-14-2004, 12:18 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by fishy
Yeah, NTFS is better. The only problem is that I keep my windoze installation kit on my hard drive (I hate installing it from a CD), so if there's a problem and I have to reinstall windoze, I have to do this within a MSDOS session, and MSDOS don't recognize NTFS, so I'm in deep shit. That happened to me a couple of times, and from then on FAT32 is the anwer for me... Pretty dumb, huh?

Thats is the dumbest reason i can think of for using fat32.
There is no reason not to install windows from a CD

Adultnet · 07-14-2004, 01:14 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by sandman!
Thats is the dumbest reason i can think of for using fat32.
There is no reason not to install windows from a CD

lol

NickPapageorgio · 07-14-2004, 01:16 PM

I am the fat32 vote btw.

I never go with the flow.

Project-Shadow · 07-14-2004, 01:21 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by NickPapageorgio
I am the fat32 vote btw.

I never go with the flow.

Care to say why? I've had it with Fat32.. recently changed to NTFS.. shouldn't of been so stubborn

zanycash Pete · 07-14-2004, 01:22 PM

Keep the drive FAT! if you want to repartician the drive later you will have problems with NTFS

NickPapageorgio · 07-14-2004, 01:23 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Project-Shadow
Care to say why? I've had it with Fat32.. recently changed to NTFS.. shouldn't of been so stubborn

Cause everyone else voted NTFS and I am fat too so I can kind of relate more to fat32.

**Please nominate this post for stupidest response of the day, thank you.**

Viper2K1 · 07-14-2004, 01:33 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Adultnet
Fat32 can handle large files ...

I'm not sure about that.
I had to do some DVD ripping and the output files were a couple gigs big
I was told i had to use NTFS
but then my windows98 couldn't do that, so i had to upgrade to XP

KDizzla · 07-14-2004, 02:07 PM

Uhm.. NTFS! I didn't even need to think about it.

View Poll Results: Which one?
FAT32	2	4.88%
NTFS	39	95.12%
Voters: 41. You may not vote on this poll

07-14-2004, 08:49 AM	#1
Jace FBOP Class Of 2013 Industry Role: Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: bumfuck, ky Posts: 35,562	FAT32 or NTFS? well?

07-14-2004, 08:55 AM	#2
Adultnet Confirmed User Join Date: Sep 2003 Posts: 8,713	NTFS is much better then fat32 since ntfs is the New Technology file system that Microsoft have developed it is faster, has much more security features and allows to apply security settings per file which is not possible on fat32. __________________ TrafficCashGold Paying Webmasters Since 1996! Awesome Conversions! Fast Weekly Payments! Over 125 Tours!

07-14-2004, 09:01 AM	#4
machinegunkelly Confirmed User Join Date: Jun 2003 Posts: 3,285	Last time I installed my XP I did Fat32 and my PC ran like utter shit after a few weeks , NTFS seems more stable on this install . __________________ dead.

07-14-2004, 10:01 AM	#7
sandman! Icq: 14420613 Industry Role: Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: chicago Posts: 15,432	you would have to be an idiot to install fat32. __________________ Need WebHosting ? Email me for some great deals [email protected]

07-14-2004, 09:57 AM	#6
macho Confirmed User Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: Internet Posts: 2,875	I guess NTFS is better. I use it!

07-14-2004, 10:01 AM	#8
EnigmaTek Confirmed User Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Seattle, Wa Posts: 188	NTFS is better because you can decide how big you want your hard drive sectors to be. This can give you a lot more usable space on your hard drive versus FAT16 and FAT32. __________________ SIG TOO BIG! Maximum 120x60 button and no more than 3 text lines of DEFAULT SIZE and COLOR. Unless your sig is for a GFY top banner sponsor, then you may use a 624x80 instead of a 120x60.

07-14-2004, 10:02 AM	#10
sexyclicks Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: c9media.com Posts: 3,240	NTFS is phat

07-14-2004, 10:03 AM	#11
Dildozer Confirmed User Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Montreal Posts: 7,519	Weird last time i installed it never gave me the fat32 option __________________ Spam link here

07-14-2004, 10:05 AM	#13
fishy Confirmed User Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 116	Yeah, NTFS is better. The only problem is that I keep my windoze installation kit on my hard drive (I hate installing it from a CD), so if there's a problem and I have to reinstall windoze, I have to do this within a MSDOS session, and MSDOS don't recognize NTFS, so I'm in deep shit. That happened to me a couple of times, and from then on FAT32 is the anwer for me... Pretty dumb, huh? __________________ MAILERS MAILERS: Need a hot product? Click to find out!"

07-14-2004, 11:04 AM	#14
Vitasoy GFY HALL OF FAME DAMMIT!!! Join Date: Oct 2003 Posts: 58,202	NTFS will save more space, but if you plan on installing an OS like win98 then you need fat32. __________________ [email protected]

07-14-2004, 11:28 AM	#15
mattyboy Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Apr 2003 Posts: 1,070	I'm pretty sure that FAT 32 doesn't handle files over 4 (or 5??) GB.

07-14-2004, 12:15 PM	#17
SinisterStudios Confirmed User Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: New Joisey Posts: 3,087	F the microcrap stuff and go with the penguin, linux is a much better os and works well on the desktop if you have the time to make it all work. Otherwise NTFS cant be beat __________________ SEOIP.com Multiple IP Webhosting Shared and Dedicated IP's - Multiple Class A's - From $1.99/ip

07-14-2004, 01:16 PM	#20
NickPapageorgio Confirmed User Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: NC Posts: 8,323	I am the fat32 vote btw. I never go with the flow. __________________

07-14-2004, 01:22 PM	#22
zanycash Pete Confirmed User Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: California Posts: 1,023	Keep the drive FAT! if you want to repartician the drive later you will have problems with NTFS __________________ $45 Per Join or 60/40 Rev Share! New Fresh Hosted Galleries And High Quality/Converting Sites! Free Hosting, Free Content, Awsome Free Hosted Gallery Generator! ICQ#249-429-941

07-14-2004, 02:07 PM	#25
KDizzla Confirmed User Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: South Hampton Posts: 1,795	Uhm.. NTFS! I didn't even need to think about it. __________________ www.ogrish.com