Please report all spam threads, posts and suspicious members. We receive spam notifications and will take immediate action!
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 17 of 17

Thread: Transfer Operation System to new hard drive




  1. #11
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Posts
    4,246

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Wiggo
    The only thing is that the author of this thread has in no way mentioned Linux so why have others? (but then FAT32 is still easier to work with) :confused:
    it's here:
    Quote Originally Posted by Yawgm0th
    Personally, I prefer FAT32 because it's readable from Windows 98 (I have a 98\XP\Linux dual boot) and might in the future be readable by Linux. On top of that, FAT32 has a 5 minute error check whereas NTFS can take over 3 hours depending on the hard drive.
    it wasn't brought up by the author, but it still came up anyway. it's funny how a small little comment can make a thread take on a new course.

    *btw, welcome to tweaktown Yawgm0th & ajay67 :)
    I've gone too far and need to move on!

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    8

    Default

    thanks for all your good feedback. I've got my HD already, I'll install it after reviewing all feedbacks.

    BTW can I format to FAT32 using XP, or I have to do it with win98? If dual-boot is good, then I rather keep my win98 on old drive

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    caves of bedrock
    Posts
    3,129

    Default

    IIRC XP does provide you an option to format the drive in FAT32 or NTFS at the time of install process. you can do it from there.
    if you don't want to use Win98 at all then i don't see any reason as to why you should have it.
    Latest Microsoft Security Updates.
    Last Updated:
    10th MARCH


    If you are a security freak: Use Microsoft Baseline Security Analyzer (NT/2000/XP/2003)
    ======================
    icq : 203189004
    jabber : asklepios20@jabber.org
    =======================
    Linux user since: April 24, 2003 312478
    yabaa dabaa doo...
    Customized for 1024x768

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Minnesota, United States
    Posts
    4,543

    Default

    If your going to dual boot, just format in FAT32 (unless you want NTFS) from Windows 98 and when XP asks where to install it make sure you select your new drive and the correct partition. You will have to have 3 seperate partitions, which isn't a bad thing neccesarily. If you mess up and have to reinstall and still want a dual boot system, make sure you install 98 first (it will overwrite XP's boot loader otherwise). You can format from XP's install disk, but it's faster and easier from 98 (in my opinion). As for Linux, I was lying when I said my distro might be getting old, I'm using RedHat 9. I was just trying to hide the fact that I'm only a small step above newbie in terms of Linux familiarty. I'm sorry :o . Interesting about the NTFS update. I might try that in the future if and when I build another computer. There isn't any way to get RedHat to read and/or write to FAT32 currently is there?

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    caves of bedrock
    Posts
    3,129

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Yawgm0th
    There isn't any way to get RedHat to read and/or write to FAT32 currently is there?
    i think you meant NTFS there. didn't you? cos Redhat 9 or any other distro can very well use FAT32 as easily as it can use may be ext2, ext3 or reiserfs for that matter. just not for installation purpose otherwise it is a great file-system to have on a machine with both Linux and Windows.
    about NTFS and Redhat. just go to http://linux-ntfs.sourceforge.net/ and read on. you will be amazed to see as to how simple it is :cheers:
    Latest Microsoft Security Updates.
    Last Updated:
    10th MARCH


    If you are a security freak: Use Microsoft Baseline Security Analyzer (NT/2000/XP/2003)
    ======================
    icq : 203189004
    jabber : asklepios20@jabber.org
    =======================
    Linux user since: April 24, 2003 312478
    yabaa dabaa doo...
    Customized for 1024x768

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Posts
    4,246

    Default

    I'm just sitting here bored at work and I remembered something...

    there is software available that allows you to read and write to ntfs partitions from win9x. I had read about it a while back but forgot since I don't use win9x these days :o Anyway, I'm not going to spoil the fun, so I'll let you search for the software/solution ;)

    at least this way you can format your winxp partition/hdd with ntfs which has significant advantages over fat32
    I've gone too far and need to move on!

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Minnesota, United States
    Posts
    4,543

    Default

    http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/e.../october01.asp

    "To NTFS or not to NTFS—that is the question. But unlike the deeper questions of life, this one isn't really all that hard to answer. For most users running Windows XP, NTFS is the obvious choice. It's more powerful and offers security advantages not found in the other file systems. But let's go over the differences among the files systems so we're all clear about the choice. There are essentially three different file systems available in Windows XP: FAT16, short for File Allocation Table, FAT32, and NTFS, short for NT File System.

    FAT16
    The FAT16 file system was introduced way back with MS–DOS in 1981, and it's showing its age. It was designed originally to handle files on a floppy drive, and has had minor modifications over the years so it can handle hard disks, and even file names longer than the original limitation of 8.3 characters, but it's still the lowest common denominator. The biggest advantage of FAT16 is that it is compatible across a wide variety of operating systems, including Windows 95/98/Me, OS/2, Linux, and some versions of UNIX. The biggest problem of FAT16 is that it has a fixed maximum number of clusters per partition, so as hard disks get bigger and bigger, the size of each cluster has to get larger. In a 2–GB partition, each cluster is 32 kilobytes, meaning that even the smallest file on the partition will take up 32 KB of space. FAT16 also doesn't support compression, encryption, or advanced security using access control lists.

    FAT32
    The FAT32 file system, originally introduced in Windows 95 Service Pack 2, is really just an extension of the original FAT16 file system that provides for a much larger number of clusters per partition. As such, it greatly improves the overall disk utilization when compared to a FAT16 file system. However, FAT32 shares all of the other limitations of FAT16, and adds an important additional limitation—many operating systems that can recognize FAT16 will not work with FAT32—most notably Windows NT, but also Linux and UNIX as well. Now this isn't a problem if you're running FAT32 on a Windows XP computer and sharing your drive out to other computers on your network—they don't need to know (and generally don't really care) what your underlying file system is.

    The Advantages of NTFS
    The NTFS file system, introduced with first version of Windows NT, is a completely different file system from FAT. It provides for greatly increased security, file–by–file compression, quotas, and even encryption. It is the default file system for new installations of Windows XP, and if you're doing an upgrade from a previous version of Windows, you'll be asked if you want to convert your existing file systems to NTFS. Don't worry. If you've already upgraded to Windows XP and didn't do the conversion then, it's not a problem. You can convert FAT16 or FAT32 volumes to NTFS at any point. Just remember that you can't easily go back to FAT or FAT32 (without reformatting the drive or partition), not that I think you'll want to.

    The NTFS file system is generally not compatible with other operating systems installed on the same computer, nor is it available when you've booted a computer from a floppy disk. For this reason, many system administrators, myself included, used to recommend that users format at least a small partition at the beginning of their main hard disk as FAT. This partition provided a place to store emergency recovery tools or special drivers needed for reinstallation, and was a mechanism for digging yourself out of the hole you'd just dug into. But with the enhanced recovery abilities built into Windows XP (more on that in a future column), I don't think it's necessary or desirable to create that initial FAT partition.

    When to Use FAT or FAT32
    If you're running more than one operating system on a single computer (see my earlier column Multibooting Made Easy), you will definitely need to format some of your volumes as FAT. Any programs or data that need to be accessed by more than one operating system on that computer should be stored on a FAT16 or possibly FAT32 volume. But keep in mind that you have no security for data on a FAT16 or FAT32 volume—any one with access to the computer can read, change, or even delete any file that is stored on a FAT16 or FAT32 partition. In many cases, this is even possible over a network. So do not store sensitive files on drives or partitions formatted with FAT file systems."

    While this article is somewhat dated (late 2001), I figured this was accurate. I was never given the choice of formating anything in FAT32 or FAT16 (just plain FAT) when I installed RedHat 9.0, even if I used disk druid instead of auto formatting. It is possible (albeit unlikely) that I simply am so inexperienced with Linux that I simply don't know how to find my FAT32 partitions. Would my partitions be labled by their drive letter and/or name that both 98 and XP use? If not, where would they be? (Sorry to turn this topic into something totally unrelated to what it was originally intended to be).

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •