NTFS5 VS FAT32

That's the common question asked regarding NTFS for people shifting to WinNT/2k. Since you will only have one dedicated OS, both file systems are fine, especially if you do not have multiple users.

If you choose to have NTFS (on one or both drives), you CAN run files written under FAT16, FAT32 or NTFS; vice versa, even on a system with different OSes. NTFS is ONLY an enhanced file system with security features.

Here are some examples:

1- Your primary HD with Win2k (NTFS) can access, read and write data from the secondary drive (Win98/no OS) with FAT32. However, whether boot using a floppy (MS-DOS) or Win98 as a secondary (or even primary) OS, you can not access the other drive/s formatted under NTFS. This is a security feature.

2- The drive/s formatted as NTFS and you have multiple users for the system. As the Administrator, you can set quotas for each users, say 500MBs each. They'll see that the drive/s free space will decrease to zero as they approach their quota limit, although the true free space is only available under the eyes of the administrator.

3- Each user may encrypt their files to prevent other registered users' access. In addition, users can also hide their files so that it is not mapped when other users do a search for, say *.doc.

4- The compression issue is only an option for users to reduce space usage and is file selected, unlike DriveSpace which compresses the whole drive and reducing overall performance. Similar to this, files compressed under NTFS will take longer time to be read/written.

5- NTFS does not affect softwares, and although it isn't proven that you'll get better stability and performance increase, theoretically it is supposed to as WinNT/2k is optimized for NTFS (though only for the security features).


Bottom line is, you don't need to use NTFS if you're the only user for the system and that you plan to have a second OS which could be a headache, unless the second OS is planned for other users. They won't see the NTFS drive's existence. If you plan to go back to Win98 later, you'll need to rerun the Win2k setup installation and change the file system back to FAT32 and backing up is very troublesome.

I'd stick to FAT32 if I'm the only user. However, WinXP only runs under NTFS so there's really no harm moving towards it now - unless you're going back to Win98.


Azlan

Azlan,

Windows XP will run under FAT32. It is not limited to NTFS. I am running it right now with FAT32. The final version will be the same.



Ralph Caddell

Dimension 4100 800 Mhz
256 MB PC133 RAM
Dell M781S Monitor
48X CD
Ricoh MP9120A CD-R/RW/DVD
20 g Maxtor HD 7200 RPM
30 g Maxtor HD 7200 RPM
ATI All-In-Wonder 32mb
Logitech Optical Mouse Man Wheel
SB Live Value
Altec Lansing ACS-340 Speakers w/Subwoofer
Windows ME/Windows XP Dual Boot
NAV 2001
Zone Alarm Pro
No Money Left
Wife Unhappy Send Donations

No I haven't heard anyone with XPS R400 who has upgraded to win2K. I guess I'll be the one who will be doing it to show you guys. I'll upgrade wo win2K when I get my CPU P3 1Gig, so as soon as I get that CPU I'll put a post about how it all went and with the new OS and all.

I, too, am planning on upgrading my XPS R400 to W2K. I recently did so with my Dell 7500 laptop w/o any problems (I converted to NTFS, btw). However, I note that the Dell Dimension XPS R400 is not listed on the Microsoft W2K Compatibility list while a slew of other Dell desktops are. Do you know of any XPS R400 owner who has successfully taken the plunge to W2K?

Regards,
Will