[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Verbatim 1TB external HDD



On Wed, Aug 25, 2010 at 9:26 AM, Jordon Bedwell <jordon@envygeeks.com> wrote:
>  On 8/25/2010 7:12 AM, Jochen Schulz wrote:
>>
>> Jordon Bedwell:
>>>>
>>>> Jochen Schulz wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> No, they couldn't. :) Windows (since at least XP) doesn't allow
>>>>> formatting disks larger than (IIRC) 32GB with the FAT filesystem. It's
>>>>> either NTFS or… NTFS.
>>>
>>> […] Yes, Windows XP will format a drive way past 32GB, it's
>>> plain silly to say it won't, you have to manually chose the cluster
>>> size though. Another anti-Microsoft fan I assume.
>>
>> Maybe you should have read what Microsoft writes before calling me
>> names. Quoting<http://support.microsoft.com/kb/314463/>:
>>
>> | You cannot format a volume larger than 32 GB in size using the FAT32
>> | file system in Windows 2000. The Windows 2000 FastFAT driver can mount
>> | and support volumes larger than 32 GB that use the FAT32 file system
>> | (subject to the other limits), but you cannot create one using the
>> | Format tool. This behavior is by design. If you need to create a volume
>> | larger than 32 GB, use the NTFS file system instead.
>>
>> This link lists all supported cluster/filesystem sizes:
>>
>> http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb457112.aspx
>>
>> (Yes, there are 3rd party tools to circumvent that limitation.)
>>
>> BTW, I don't think this artificial limitation is unreasonable from
>> Microsoft's point of view. But from an outsider's perspective, it is
>> funny to see how hard MS has to fight in order to move their customer
>> base away from legacy systems and features.
>
> Calling you names? lol? And I don't need to read out-dated KB articles, I
> logged into Windows XP machine here in the office and did it before I even
> posted...I formatted an external HD with FAT32 with no problems.

If it was XP SP2, you were most probably using fat64, which doesn't
work (AFAIK) on Linux.

The technet article above was written before fat64 was published...


Reply to: