Hmm, maybe I would slowly become a believer with hard facts, and who knows, maybe I'll try an all- NTFS system one day (BTW I do currently have a partition at NTFS).
 
And true, I do have **extremely** small harddrives, one is a mere 80 Gig, the other a pity at 45 GB on my main sys. Maybe I should put in a few more drives from my other machines, so I could match the 244 GB and see the light. Beeing that I avoided ME because I didn't subscribe to the "Newer is Better" - "Bill is God" theory I don't quite see the point of the argument that NTFS is specifically designed for NT, which by the way is a bit old by know. Specifically designed are also the defrag utility of NT/XP and the CD-burning util of XP, are they also so great that you are on crack if you replace them with something else?
 
Still, this thread remains kinda short of real arguments, suspicions on my crack smoking and such doesn't explain quite what practical magic I'll get from leaving FAT. Oh, yes, I could put in the recovery console, great, one more thing to install to do exactly what theat floppy or dual boot does.
 
Good ol' Brian puts forward a good argument though, not have to see the chkdsk b-s is something I'd enjoy.
 
Who knows, more real arguments could turn me around, but crack smoking - no.
 
H.

Talking of chkdsk, is there any way to get rid of the 10 second delay/countdown when chkdsk comes up during a boot up, either because XP crashed or because you told it to run. With 98 you had the prompt/never/always setting that you could set with some tweak progs, but I have yet to see the equivalent for XP.

The checkdisk part and link I provided don't count DH? Hmmm, if I can think of other things I'll let you know. The link did state quite a bit about the differences, and having smaller clusters and the ability to store small files directly in the MFT for speedy access is pretty nice. But then again haven't had any issues where I couldn't get into my NTFS system partition without a utility (and that was only a few times for the networks that I manage).

Sure,
-chkdsk
-over 32 GB partitions
-over 4 GB files
-(nobody mentioned, but lots of files)
 
these are valid arguments.
 
But, of these three only getting rid of the chkdsk 8 sec annoyance is really what I would ever encounter at home. So I still feel very safe having the option to boot into dos, using dos tools n a dark day, and keep NTFS for those over 32 GB partitions which is a (not all that good) reason. Only have one of 'em, anyhow.
 
And security - Well, thats Mr. Smith, Mr. Wesson and me.
 
H.

Personally I've got no intention of trying to convert you.
Live and let live I say.
For the same reason I wont try and convert people from Win9x to an OS based on WinNT.
If people cannot be bothered to do the research themselves and see the obvious differences then that is up to them.
Or be told the differences but still want more.... *shrugs*
 
I have full respect for those that want to stay with older technology, there is a good argument about staying with what has been tried and tested rather than moving to something new.
I'll always stay just off bleeding edge and if anybody asks my opinion I'll report back on my experiences with that said product/system.
 
My report on the NTFS file system is a few simple words:
Fast, secure and not prone to file system errors like some others.

fat is so like uh Yesterday!....... in my clueless voice

Guys I just ran HD Tach 2.61 on that new maxtor (dont know how accurate these numbers are since its so old and im running XP) and it says im at 13.7% cpu utilization, access time 12.7ms, Read speed:Maximum 44978.0kps, minimum 20320.0kps, average 35074.1kps
 
Do these numbers seem right to you guys?
 
PS I do have the Maxtor formated to NTFS

What controller do you have those drives connected to? Must be the onboard one because I haven't seen such high utilization numbers in awhile. Have you turned on DMA and updated your busmaster drivers?

Promise Ultra100TX2
 
im running a Epox 8K7A mobo with the amd761 northbridge and via southbridge. I think XP has the most updated stuff for it

Though I didn't read the whole thread... did you format your 80GB hard drive as one partition?

yes

also guys what is the best program under XP to use to test my new HD, check for bad sectors errors etc. And also to benchmark it

That's why, when you format a large hard drive under one partition, it creates slack space because the it doesn't use the cluster space effectively, that's one reason why they say to make 10GB partitions using FAT32. You just have to look at the limitations of the file system you're going to use.

shini Im not using fat32 im using NTFS

I'm not overly familiar with NTFS, but same thing could apply? Anyone know?

80,000,000,000 / 1024 = 78125000KB / 1024 = 76293.9453125MB / 1024 = 74.5058059GB
 
Also, remember that XP reserves 8MB at the end of the HDD for use with a "Dynamic Disk" should you implement one.