3 ms·

If my memory serves well, when 40+ GB HDDs started being common, you were either using Windows 2000 and NTFS already, or it was probably a good practice to have

If my memory serves well, when 40+ GB HDDs started being common, you were either using Windows 2000 and NTFS already, or it was probably a good practice to have several partitions, given the overall unreliability of Windows 9x and the not so infrequent clean reinstallations. And then came Windows XP and the issue was moot. It's a bit of a shame Microsoft didn't push and open up exFAT earlier and allowed FAT32 to become an issue again, only with removable flash drives and memory cards this time.

AnIdiotOnTheNet 6y ago
The problem with removable drives is that no one came up with a better filesystem than FAT32 that could be implemented easily by everyone. All the *NIX filesystems embedded permissions that were useless on non-POSIX systems and caused issues on POSIX ones when you actually moved a drive from one computer to another. So MS extended FAT again and kept it under its IP hat, as was their wont[0] at the time. [0] Non-native english speakers may be confused by this: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/as%20is%20someone%27s%20wont https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/as%20is%20someone...
- josefx 6y ago
  FAT embedded a long/short name mapping algorithm that a modern system shouldn't need, but Microsoft had patents on. The main feature of FAT is simple native support on all platforms, Microsoft never had a financial incentive to add support for alternatives on Windows.
kasabali 6y ago
> It's a bit of a shame Microsoft didn't push and open up exFAT earlier and allowed FAT32 to become an issue again, only with removable flash drives and memory cards this time Erm, because that was the idea? SDXC is a big racket and Microsoft has been collecting patent fees from any kind of consumer device that's capable of reading memory cards thanks to the filesystem requirements in the standard.

AnIdiotOnTheNet 6y ago

The problem with removable drives is that no one came up with a better filesystem than FAT32 that could be implemented easily by everyone. All the *NIX filesystems embedded permissions that were useless on non-POSIX systems and caused issues on POSIX ones when you actually moved a drive from one computer to another. So MS extended FAT again and kept it under its IP hat, as was their wont[0] at the time. [0] Non-native english speakers may be confused by this: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/as%20is%20someone%27s%20wont https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/as%20is%20someone...

josefx 6y ago
FAT embedded a long/short name mapping algorithm that a modern system shouldn't need, but Microsoft had patents on. The main feature of FAT is simple native support on all platforms, Microsoft never had a financial incentive to add support for alternatives on Windows.

kasabali 6y ago

> It's a bit of a shame Microsoft didn't push and open up exFAT earlier and allowed FAT32 to become an issue again, only with removable flash drives and memory cards this time Erm, because that was the idea? SDXC is a big racket and Microsoft has been collecting patent fees from any kind of consumer device that's capable of reading memory cards thanks to the filesystem requirements in the standard.