1. Computer problem? Tech Support Guy is completely free -- paid for by advertisers and donations. Click here to join today! If you're new to Tech Support Guy, we highly recommend that you visit our Guide for New Members.

New 750 GB HD

Discussion in 'Hardware' started by robomatic, Feb 14, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Advertisement
  1. robomatic

    robomatic Thread Starter

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2004
    Messages:
    213
    I've got the hots for a 750 GB HD on sale. I'm not sure if it is SATA or PATA, but if it is PATA I'm curious if I can put it in an external drive box and if my Windows XP will recognize and address the entire drive. I want it to be one big FAT partition, and I want to use Linux for the format, since Windows won't let you FAT partition that size.

    I've noticed when I've purchased large external drives, they come preformatted in FAT.
     
  2. Compiler

    Compiler

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2006
    Messages:
    5,855
    FAT, period doesn't go that large.

    FAT was designed in the days of MB size HDs. At 2GB, FAT has problems. FAT32 does not go beyond 64gb. Linux, it maybe different - but Linux does support other formats besides FAT for large paritions.

    Also, the idea of a 750GB FAT drivce... ugh! It would turn it into a 300GB drive... perhaps 512k Cluters. A 1k file would eat 512k of space.
     
  3. telegramsam

    telegramsam

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2006
    Messages:
    1,085
  4. JohnWill

    JohnWill Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2002
    Messages:
    106,418
    Windows just won't let you format a partition that size.

    I think it's foolish to create one giant FAT32 partition on that disk, much too easily corrupted.
     
  5. usualsuspect

    usualsuspect

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2002
    Messages:
    548
    Do you mind me asking what you use that kinda size for???
     
  6. robomatic

    robomatic Thread Starter

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2004
    Messages:
    213
    I was kissing a lot of old family record and tape albums goodbye, but I converted a lot of 'em to wave files as I was listening to them, hence I wound up with some large collections of raw wave music. Keeping them together on a large drive is one way to go.

    I've worked with FAT32 and NTFS formatted drives. I've heard various stories of why NTFS is 'better'. The only thing I believe is that it 'can' be made more secure, but I've purchased several large external drives, and they've all come single partition FAT32, and endured a lot of use. I've not yet had 'corruption' attributable to type of format.

    Linux has more than one FAT32 format, in fact, and doesn't use NTFS.
     
  7. JohnWill

    JohnWill Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2002
    Messages:
    106,418
    Linux only has one FAT32 format, the other Linux filesystem formats are not FAT anything. :)

    As far as NTFS vs. FAT32, NTFS, there are many sites that explain the differences and why NTFS is more robust.

    And for another reference, How NTFS Works.
     
  8. etaf

    etaf Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2003
    Messages:
    65,252
    First Name:
    Wayne
  9. usualsuspect

    usualsuspect

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2002
    Messages:
    548
    lol, yeah that's even more ridiculous. I've got one with 1001GB though:D
     
  10. robomatic

    robomatic Thread Starter

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2004
    Messages:
    213

    Please see my earlier message (to which there was no reply):

    http://forums.techguy.org/unix-linux/398379-fat-32-fat-32-lba.html

    I've looked at some of the references you've made and I've seen reasons why NTFS can be made more secure, may be more efficient, but I haven't seen anything that says it is more robust. And in my experience, glitches have taken down two of my NTFS drives at different times. I have yet to lose a FAT32 drive to glitches.
     
  11. telegramsam

    telegramsam

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2006
    Messages:
    1,085
    XP and 2K wouldn't care about a non-master formatted to FAT32. The OS itself has to be on NTFS, though.

    HP's recovery partitions are FAT32 on the same HDD that is NTFS on XP systems.
     
  12. JohnWill

    JohnWill Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2002
    Messages:
    106,418
    Read the message you quoted from me! The journaling makes a huge difference. Can an NTFS get corrupted? Sure, and so can FAT32, only it's more likely.

    The fact that you have had issues with NTFS and never had a problem with FAT32 is a sample of one, not exactly statistically significant. Obviously, you have your heart set on FAT32, so I'm not sure what the discussion is all about. :)
     
  13. robomatic

    robomatic Thread Starter

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2004
    Messages:
    213
    telegramsam i couldn't make head or tails of your last sentence.

    John, maybe you're trying to make the point that NTFS has fault tolerance that FAT32 does not.
     
  14. JohnWill

    JohnWill Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2002
    Messages:
    106,418
    Well, yes, that's exactly the point I'm trying to make. ;)
     
  15. win2kpro

    win2kpro

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2005
    Messages:
    11,670
    Why? :confused:
     
  16. Sponsor

As Seen On
As Seen On...

Welcome to Tech Support Guy!

Are you looking for the solution to your computer problem? Join our site today to ask your question. This site is completely free -- paid for by advertisers and donations.

If you're not already familiar with forums, watch our Welcome Guide to get started.

Join over 733,556 other people just like you!

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Short URL to this thread: https://techguy.org/544057

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice