Printable View
I'm currently using FAT32 on W2k but thinking of converting to NTFS.
Is there any advantage to converting to NTFS?
My hd is currently partitioned into C (W2k); D (My Docs); E (TempInternet Files); F (Stuff) and G (ImageFiles) Presumably I would have to convert all partitions? Does Partition Magic do this for me or is there some W2k utility?
Many thanks in advance for your advice,
Rex
Some advantages are, the enhanced security, better file handling, quicker access to files and many other things along the line of performance gains.
If you are thinking about it, then go for it, you will not be sorry in the long run...
Unless there is a good reason for using FAT32, such as dual-booting with Win9x/ME, then you should definitely use NTFS. It was specifically designed for use with the NT-based OS's, and will enable several features that are unavailable with FAT32. Also, it is a far more robust filesystem and your data will be safer.
NTFS vs FAT, which is right for you?
Hey Nick, It's also okay to have a FAT32 partition for 9x and a seperate NTFS partition for NT based stuff. I did that once on a Sony I had (still have somewhere). I wanted to keep the Win2k stuff out of view of my kids, since they used ME for gaming only. NTFS can always see FAT but not vica versa (unless the 9x that is being used is NTFS aware). -- Just a thought, since it takes a little more foresight to plan layout, it may not be the most popular solution.
Of course it doesn't work at all if both OS's are on the same partition. Don't ask me why people do that, but they do.
;)
I'm a bit lost here; obviously it is OK to convert all partitions (os and files) but is it possible to convert D; E; F; and G but keep the OS (W2k on C) not converted to NTFS.
I know that NTFS / FAT32 is do do with the filing system, but is the OS part of that 'filing system?'
Rex
NTFS and FAT (FAT32 or FAT16) are filestores developed by MS. FAT stands for File Access Table (I'm pretty sure) and NTFS means NT File System (NT means New Technology at least according to MS it's new - most folks think it is a rehash of DEC's VMS). The advantages of the filestores have been laid out by ecrosson and SuperSparks.
Anyway the answer to part 1 of your last question is yes. You can leave W2K on C in FAT32, although I don't know why you would, there is no advantage to be had.
The 2nd part "is the OS part of that 'filing system?". No it is not. The OS is seperate from the file system. Filestores or file systems are organizational structures designed to make use of mass storage media. Back in the far flung reaches of time, computers had no such thing as filesystems. Most Operating Systems (OS's) today can use many types of file systems (for example your W2k can use NTFS and FAT32 and FAT16 all at the same time - it knows how to use others too, but that's for another discussion.). Contrary to popular belief there are OS and file systems not made by Microsoft (I know that's hard to believe, but it's true - we should keep this info to ourselves ;) ) that also read/write many different types and designs of filestores.
Bottom line, and all kidding aside, go with NTFS.
Joe, I agree entirely, I did that myself in the past back when I used to dual boot with WinME.
Rex, yes indeed you can convert whichever partitions you like. Win 2000 will read any partition regardless of whether it is FAT or NTFS. In fact I always keep a small FAT32 partition in case I ever feel the need to mess about in DOS, and it can also be handy for some maintenance/disaster recovery purposes.
FAT (File Allocation Table) or NTFS (New Technology Filing System), are just (proprietary Microsoft) means of storing data on a hard drive. Other OS's use different filesystems. The OS can only read from a filesystem that it understands - Win2000 wouldn't be able to read a drive formatted with a Mac or Linux, for example, so in that sense OS's and filesystems are inextricably linked. But you can't really descibe one as being "part of" the other.
If you already have Win2000 installed on FAT32 is there some converision utility or better off reinstalling ?
Gentlemen,
Thankf for your replies. Nix raises an interesting point, is ti better to convert or reinstall?
I think the main reason for my initial question is this. I have a Ghost image of C: (W2k) and I guess that is FAT32. I also have some old files on both floppy and CD which will be FAT32. If I convert to NTFS, will I still be able to access these files and in a worst case scenario, would I be able to restore from my Ghost image?
Rex
First - floppies are actually FAT12, not FAT32, and data CD's are either UDF or Joliet format :)
second - Ghost restores the whole file structure to what it was at the time of the backup, and is pretty much fil-system-independent.
Either way, you should create a new Ghost image just before doing the conversion - and a second just after - so that you have something to fall back on if it all goes wrong.
So there is a conversion tool ?Quote:
Originally Posted by NoelMVP
Yes indeed, go to the Command Prompt and type "convert x: fs/ntfs" without the quotes, and where x: is the drive letter of the volume that you wish to convert. However, there are two important caveats:
1) This is a one way process, to go back to FAT32 requires either a 3rd party tool or a reformat.
2) Care needs to be taken to avoid a 512byte cluster size, which isn't wonderful for perfomance. Read this article first:
Converting FAT32 to NTFS
One final note. NTFS has more information per file than FAT (security, user allocation, etc.), so going the opposite way NTFS -> FAT is not recommended since information is always lost. The content of the file remains intact but all the data that gives NTFS its more robust character is lost. Once you change to NTFS don't regress; also, it is a bad idea to change an already existing NTFS file system to FAT. Third party programs like Partition Magic can be used to convert file systems in either direction. Partition Magic has other useful features that you may or may not be interested in. It's not free or even cheap for that matter.
Cheers :)
Again, many thanks for the advice.
Seems like I should go for NTFS although I have little or no interest in any of its security features. Haven't needed them in the past, can't see why I would need them in the future. I am only interested in NTFS because I think it has a better and more efficient filing system that reduces fragmentation. Is this correct? I am starting to do stuff with PhotoShop and my large image files (100mb) seem to get fragmented quickly.
I have Partition Magic and know that I can convert using that. Is using PM8 better/worse/ no different to using the W2k command?
Also, will NTFS be able to read any/all of my back-ups created with a FAT32 based OS? Will NTFS be able to read my floppies?
Rex
Well being the experimenter that I am and willing to re-install if necessary, I booted into Win2000 and did a search for convert.
Double clicked on the found .exe and a dos box appeared for a fleeting moment.
Started up a dos box and navigaed to the necessary directory and entered convert /? to find out what the parameters.
They were as per what Supersparks said so thats what i did.
Took about 5 minutes all up to convert the 2Gb partition and reboot, all with no issues that i can see.
I'll have to check what the cluster size is.
Remember the OS and the file system are seperate (closely coupled as the Comp Sci types say, but fundementally abstracted). Win2k (The Operating System) will read and write to both FAT and NTFS (these are just names of 2 different file systems that Win2k knows how to read and write. NTFS doesn't read or write anything it is just a data structure (the same is true of FAT), Win2k, the OS does the reading and the writing. Don't worry about floppies, they have their own file structure and the OS (Win2k) knows how to read and write those too.
BTW, what is true for Win2k is also true for NT and XP also, since they all have the same related underlying OS.
Thanks gentlemen,
I'll take an up to date image and document back-up, and go for it.
Rex
Well in answer to the last question, the cluster size was 512kb so I did a format and reinstall on the same partition and now it's 4096.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nix