Is it theoretically possible to implement support for the NTFS format under Windows 98/SE/ME? And if it is possible, then why hasn't someone taken this up yet? By "implement" I mean full integration - full read/write access in a way such that it is almost indestinguishable to Windows from a FAT-32 partition. And by "support" I mean 80% or more of the NTFS functionality available in Windows 2000.

I do know there are a number of applications available and projects underway to provide support for NTFS in other operating systems and some have been around for several years. Some examples would be NTFS-3G, which is a stable, open source, freely available read/write NTFS driver for Linux, FreeBSD, Mac OS X, NetBSD, and Haiku. And there's Linux-NTFS, which is an open source project to add NTFS support to the Linux kernel.

With regard to the problems of NTFS compatibility on older Windows, this Wikipedia article on NTFS explains:

Still, there are several different software packages available which provides NTFS support for the Windows 98 series:

DiskInternals > NTFS Reader for Windows 95, 98, Me

NTFS for Windows 98 (v1.03) (Sysinternals)

Paragon > NTFS for Win 98

Purenetworking.net > NFTS FOR WINDOWS 95/98/ME

The first two links above are for freeware. However, the second two are commercial products. And they can be rather pricey. ($79 or more?! ) In some cases the software only allows reading and/or writing of files through an explorer-like interface, but some have more to offer. I noticed one of the commercial products claims "NTFS drives behave just like regular FAT and FAT32 drives." Unfortunately, several of these packages require files from either Windows NT 4.0 or Windows 2000 in order to work.

BTW: One of the freeware NTFS for Windows 98 solutions above is originally from a website called "Sysinternals" and a company called "Winternals Software." However, the company was bought out by Microsoft a couple years ago and several of their free programs have been removed from the site, including the NTFS for Windows 98 software. (So now we have to dig around for old copies.)

Anyway, if it is possible to implement NTFS into Windows 98 itself (through a major hack), I doubt it could support the extra file security that NT/2K/XP boasts. But it seems the biggest obstacle to such an implementation is the fact that the Windows 98 OS is still actually MS-DOS underneath. So it seems that NTFS support would have to be provided on the DOS level first, before Windows boots.

From an archived copy of the original Sysinternals description of their program I found this:

Archive.org > Sysinternals.com >NTFS for Windows 98

I do think it is technically possible to integrate at least partial support for NTFS to the Windows 9x family, but it would be a lot of work. To start with, I think you'd need a DOS implementation of NTFS.

I was thinking about the possibility of installing FreeDOS underneath Windows 98, thinking that perhaps the FreeDOS team may have implemented NTFS already. But then I read this:

Wikipedia > FreeDOS

and this:

Once I read that, I vaguely recalled reading about such products several years ago.

Wikipedia > NTFSDOS

This, however, was another product of Winternals Software. Microsoft bought them out recently and this was another program that was removed from their website. It is now considered abandonware:

Avira > Avira NTFS4DOS

This company does provide a "Personal" edition as freeware, provided it is only for personal use. And it does allow both reading from and writing to NTFS partitions. Though I'm not sure of the extent of its functionality. For the business environment they are selling their "Premium" edition. Their site says it "has the same functional range as the Personal version," so I wonder if this means the Personal version has nearly the same features.

Despite the lack of official NTFS support, I still think the best hope of integrating NTFS might be through FreeDOS. It sounds like the NTFS Wikipedia article used to state "The read/write NTFS-3G driver has been also ported to FreeBSD, Mac OS X, NetBSD, Haiku and FreeDOS..." Looking on the NTFS-3G website, one does not find a simple download solution for FreeDOS. However, someone asked about this on their forum. Apparently, it can be done, but it needs to be compiled from the library.

NTFS-3G > Forum > NTFS-3G and FreeDOS


Also, searching through the old FreeDOS news archives, I found this mention of NTFS:

Perhaps it would be possible to compile NTFS-3G to work under MS-DOS and Windows 98? If not, it has already been shown to work under FreeDOS, provided it is properly compiled. And while FreeDOS by itself may not be able to replace MS-DOS under Windows, it can run alongside MS-DOS. And with additional free software, FreeDOS can support Win32 applications - including limited support for Windows.

On the FreeDOS Wikipedia article:


This HX DOS Extender is free, by the way and source code is available. And their website states "Furthermore HX implements - limited - support for windows, DirectDraw, GDI and even OpenGL graphics."

There is also the FreeDOS-32 project, which also supports Win32 applications.

Wikipedia > FreeDOS:

Unfortunately, looking at their website, it seems they're still in the pre-
beta stage and the last update to their news archive appears to be from December of 2005.

Still, it looks like open-source solutions for NTFS integration into DOS are available. So what's stopping Windows 98 integration?

(edit: You posted a link to NTFS for Windows98 I see now. But it seems to perform what you're looking for)

Even if you patch FreeDOS to boot off of an NTFS partition, you still have to patch Windows 98 to run off of FreeDOS.

There's one way to boot 9x from NTFS: grub loader for DOS. It provides emulated hard disk or floppy drive image to boot from via int 13h, from FAT or NTFS. Then, in theory, some Windows 9x NTFS driver will load itself and disable int 13h hook. And on shutdown, it will write updated registry back into image. However, with existing tools, it is a hard and unreliable solution.

Already using NTFS for Win98, all i'd like to have is a way to de/compress files (some Win9x variant of compact.exe from XP would do) and to create/delete hardlinks. This on data partitions of course, no need to use NTFS on the C: drive.

Well, at least I now know it is possible. You said that "...in theory, some Windows 9x NTFS driver will load itself and disable int 13h hook. And on shutdown, it will write updated registry back into image." Could you be more specific on how this might be accomplished? Is it just a matter of properly setting up say, NTFS for Windows 98, and the grub loader?


I have a desire to see NTFS used on the C: drive. If this could be easily demonstrated as feasible, then perhaps it would be possible for "KernelEx" or a similar project to one day more thorougly and accurately integrate support for XP applications. Some XP applications require support for NTFS and will not function without this.

Since NTFS is lowering disk performance (i have measured it with HD tach) i am looking for more advanced solution - such as linux filesystems or exfat filesystem.

I have found ERTFS filesystem which seems to be most compatible with either dos and windows 9x without further patching. But it is commercial product at all and i am not sure about its compatibility and performance.

Well, installable file systems have existed since Windows for Workgroups 3.11 ! The possibility exists to implement protected mode support for virtually any file system type, including of course the NTFS (without advanced functions, security etc... which are not covered by the Windows 9x API). Small problem : since MS did not want to do it for obvious reasons (differentiate NT "professional grade" OS from home OS), you have to doo it yourself (and with very little documention at that).

Third party support for NTFS in Windows 9x /exists/, it is (was) a commercial product from Wininternals/Sysinternals.

This said, like the other responder said, if FAT32 does not satisfy your needs, why would you want a proprietary file system like NTFS ? Much more interesting and useful as an IFS would be Ext2FS (Ext3FS without the journaling). But don't hold your breath, I don't think anybody's going to implement, code and test a full IFS on Win 9x in this century.

Cheers

--
Ninho

Well, for the recordm there ARE apps for win 9x to acces ext2/ext3 filesystems:
http://martin.hinner.info/fs/Filesystems-H...ms-HOWTO-6.html
points6.5, 6.6, 6.8 and 6.9.

Most are however experimental, READ ONLY or "special applications" not real filesystem drivers like ext2fsnt.

jaclaz

Yes of course, I've used such apps, but they're not Windows installable file systems. Apples and oranges.



Precisely. Sometimes useful, but don't expect full integration.

--
Ninho

Some of you guys just aren't listening/reading to the words I wrote...

Yes, I've already mentioned (and provided links) for both "NTFS for Windows 98" and "NTFSDOS" (for DOS). However, again, neither of these program solutions will provide what I'm looking for. Furthermore:

1) Winternals Software is no longer providing any support for these products. In fact the company was bought by Microsoft and has since removed all traces of these. Try www.sysinternals.com and you will see that you end up at a microsoft.com page instead.

2) While both DiskInternals' "NTFS for Windows 98" and Winternals' "NTFS for Windows 98" are/were available as free downloads, neither of the free versions provide write access. These function as read-only. And, obviously, they don't provide full integration into Windows 98. Even the commercial products do not provide full integration.

Admittedly, the Win9x family is considered not only obsolete, but very obsolete by many. I don't see many new commercial software packages or hardware targeted for Window 9x anymore. (Probably none at all.) However, there are still many millions of Windows 9x users worldwide. And the many amazing member projects here on MSFN and elsewhere shows that, while official support for Windows 9x has been dropped, users do and will continue to develop their own support and software for the OS they love.

Besides, if someone did implement and code a full IFS for Win9x, I'm sure they would not have to test and debug all on their own. There would be plenty of us willing to test and write bug reports for them.

Why the interest in NTFS for Win9x? I've got several reasons:

1) Some of us prefer the lightweight footprint, speed, and familiarity that the Windows 98 family provides over the sluggish, cumbersome, resource-hog that is Windows XP and especially Windows Vista. And then there's the whole matter of security flaws and trust of XP/Vista... And some of us can still find a great deal of use left in old, obsolete systems. Such old PCs may not be able to run Vista adequately, but they are more than capable of running Windows 98 - with plenty of horsepower left for Win9x apps. Unfortunately, all new computers come installed with XP or Vista. Increasingly, even XP is hard to find as it seems like most everyone is forced into Vista. And, remember, both XP and Vista rely on the NTFS file system.

You see, some of us often find ourselves in need of a method of transferring files and other data between a Windows 98/SE/ME machine and an NT/2000/XP or Vista machine. Say you have a friend that came over with his laptop and you want to exchange a lot of large files without burning CDs or DVDs or repeatedly swapping your USB data stick? Or perhaps your friend's new 4 GB USB data stick is not supported in Windows 9x? (I'm quite familiar with both situations.) Or perhaps you are the one who purchased a new Vista/XP laptop and you need a way to share files with your Windows 98 machine(s)?

2) As I mentioned earlier, if full integration of NTFS in Windows 9x is made possible (without the use of an expensive commercial product), then it may be possible for a project such as "KernelEx" to more thorougly emulate and support XP applications in Windows 98 (via a kernel replacement). Wouldn't that be cool?!

Perhaps NTFS is not a perfect file system, and perhaps a Win9x implementation would not be able to support the security features and extras that 2000/XP/Vista natively sports, and for all I know Linux's ext2/ext3 file system may be enormously more efficient and more secure. However, all this is beside the point. NTFS for Windows 9x support would enable more compatibility and ease of file sharing between Win9x and the more "modern" OS's. And, while not perfect, NTFS is widely regarded as being more secure and superior to FAT16 and FAT32 in several different ways.

Here's another NTFS project I found:
Captive: The first free NTFS read/write filesystem for GNU/Linux

Admittedly, this is NTFS support for Linux. And while they did succeed in full implementation, the project appears to no longer be maintained. Though, the source code is still available. I thought it was interesting that they implemented this via WINE, which is the Linux Windows emulator program. Perhaps it would be possible to modify this into a hack to get NTFS support for Win9x? Though, again, a person would still need the original Windows ntfs.sys driver file in order for this to work.

The "security" of NTFS is useful only if the operating system can use the permissions features. 9x cannot, and probably never will, be able to implement those types of partitions. Even Linux, with a comparable security model, currently does not. It sets all permissions to Administrator. Not too much of a problem, since most XP users are administrators anyway, but it's still not a good way to do things.

Plus, NTFS has something called "streams". Data can be hidden in a stream in a way that is almost undetectable. When you open a file with hidden streams, it can load up a sort of "trojan horse."

http://www.windowsecurity.com/articles/Alt...ta_Streams.html

Sorry, I am listening, you are not ! NTFS for Windows 9x, by Winternals (Mark Russinovich, now with Microsoft) - was a full IFS, read/write. (The free demo was crippled to read-only). DOSNTFS, from the same author, is a different hack by the way : a rescue system, not a Windows IFS.

I am well aware these are no more supported, but they are available from the web - the free versions, and (if you want to check my assertions, for educational purposes only) the for-pay versions can be found also. I did test years ago, and deleted the 'warez' after testing. But I kept NTFSDOS (the free trial, hacked for read-write by myself for my own use) on diskettes as a souvenir. We have Bart PE nowadays, and NTFS access from Linux...


Anyway, my point is full NTFS support in windows 95 is feasible, as demonstrated by the ex- Winternals. If you want to redo it from scratch, great ! My other point, which you may disagree, is that apart for the beauty of the exercise, that effort would be rather moot in the 21st century. If you multi-boot, access your NTFS partition(s) from the OSes that can do so natively, and/or from Linux ; if you have only Win 9x installed on that machine, why would you want an NTFS to begin with ?

Cheers,

--
Ninho

Just to make things as clear as possible:


Yes, it is theoretically possible, and actually Wnternals, the "COMMERCIAL" brother company of Sysinternals did that in practice.


See above, it has been done.
Boot support for an IFS under Win9x/Me it is NOT possible, not even theoretically, unless one re-writes the DOS system files, integrating into them the missing filesystem.

So what is the point ?

Ranting about the fact that noone wrote a FREE app for doing that?

Well, this is the situation as per today, like it or not.

And, given the evolution of Operating Systems, it is very unlikely that anyone with the right knowledge for writing such a piece of code will be willing to do so, but you never know.

Maybe, if Sysinternals were NOT bought by Microsoft, Mark Russinovich might have decided to release the old Winternals driver as Freeware, soon or late, but releasing the driver is evidently against current MS policies, so this makes this event even more unlikely.


Yep, that's the idea about the "for the record" innuendo, the post was made trying to add some related information, specifying the limitations of the linked apps, but don't be so sure about the actual differences between Apples and Oranges:
http://www.improb.com/airchives/paperair/v...1-3-apples.html




jaclaz

Well I have began writing an NTFS file system driver at the beginning of this month

But don't hold your breath. It's in VERY early stage and mostly unfunctional.

Some details:
It it based on ntfs-3g and plain 98 DDK. It is a protected mode (Windows only) driver. So far I have been able to integrate ntfs-3g into VxD driver and successfully recognize and mount NTFS partition. Drive letters for NTFS partitions are assigned and disk size is displayed. But that's all I have done so far.

The problem is that the documentation from DDK is not good at all. It lacks examples. Ioctl16 documentation is missing. There are many secret parameters which are not listed but used extensively in VFAT.

Therefore I have a request. I'm searching for this book in digital form:
Inside The Windows 95 File System, by Stan Mitchell
This book is out of print and is not available in my country.
Any other books about Windows 9x filesystems might also be useful.

GOOD news.

I don't have any of the books you cited, maybe something in these:
http://www.pcausa.com/resources/ifsqlist.html
http://www.techsoftpl.com/vxd/sample.htm
http://www.chsw.com/ddk/
may help you?

If the problems you are having are in the IFS/hooking part, you may want to review the Sources for fsdext2:
http://www.dcee.net/Files/Programm/Windows/fsdext2.zip
or some of the other programs you can find on that page:
http://www.dcee.net/Files/Programm/Windows/


jaclaz

P.S.: The book is available (used) from as low as $2.79:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/offer-listing/156...1981643-2719235
even adding to it the Standard International Shipping rate of $12.49:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/help/customer/dis...p;nodeId=537734
should be convenient.

Be aware of this, however:
http://www.themobiusproject.com/mirrors/ww.../Resources.html

omnifs.exe from symantec Ghost is another tool that allows NTFS access from DOS/Win98.

I have tested Winternals NTFS Reader/Writer for Win98.

It uses VXD driver with original NTFS driver from windows 2k and it seems to me as reverse engineered form of communication. NTFS read and write is surely possible via VXD driver. Not only theoretically but also practically.

I want to use NTFS filesystem for better video capturing. Therefore i need application at good level and so much reliable as possible. Winternals/Sysinternals is not one of them - disc activity was slightly affected by it, but it shows that this kind of operations are at least possible.

I feel that this is worth bumping this topic even if it is nearly a year old!

The full version of Paragon NTFS for Win98 3.0.2.2 is currently available free of charge for read/write access.
NTFS for Win98 uses a single VxD solution with no dependancies on Microsoft NT files.
If is designated for non-commercial use only:

http://www.paragon-software.com/home/ntfs-win98/

I've been testing it and so far it works well.
The installer warns you to disable Recycle Bin on the NTFS drive in Windows 9x.
If you don't, like I didn't, the Recycle Bin on the NTFS drive becomes corrupt and causes minor NTFS file system errors that requires chkdsk /f run from Windows XP.

I was mainly interested in access to files over 4GiB in size.
Windows Explorer in 9x displays file sizes correctly when over 4GiB, but if you try to copy an over 4GiB file, it truncates the copy (remainder of file size divided by 4GiB).
From a command prompt, dir only lists a truncated file size, and the copy command only copies the truncated size.
xcopy fails with Warning: File too large to be copied

I have not yet devised a method of testing if an application can read the whole file, or whether it gets truncated, or wraps at the 4GiB point...
If anyone has any good ideas or some kind of testing tool to check access to over 4GiB files on an external file system on 9x, then please speak up! (or is that post up?)

What about a video file that is over 4GBs ? Shouldnt be a problem to create one that big.

Thanks Lecco.
A video file could be a good idea since I can visually check if it's all there or if it wraps.

Thanks a BUNCH!

This was just what I needed to send .wav files (~200-400mb in size) from an old Windows 98SE recording machine to an XP (NTFS) machine over the network to do the burning of the .wav files.

Ran

Well, here's the issue. First off, you'd never be able to run the OS from an NTFS drive, it would require far too major changes to the closed source kernel we don't have access to.

It's not very hard to write a program to read/write NTFS drives, maybe by the use of a simple virtual real mode driver.

However, when you speak of system wide NTFS support, you are talking a far more complex job. In order to natively support a different file system, and have explorer, amongst all Windows applications be able to write to NTFS as if it were nothing, you'd have to implement the support at the kernel level. Again, when you speak of file systems in the kernel, being closed source makes this a whole hell of a lot more difficult.

All of the GUI in Windows, including the applications, deal very little with the actual disk access of the operating system. How it works is that a basic write command in the code is sent (such as C++ or VB). When compiled, this code speaks to the APIs for that programming language, which are specifically written differently for each operating system to inferace with the kernel and other lower level code. It is THAT code, that then deals with the physical disk, and therefore, the file system. So the changes would have to be made at that level to pass up the benefits to all applications, and even Windows Explorer, which is just a basic Windows program, set as shell in boot.ini.

My guess as to why no one has bothered to implement this in Windows 98 is because it never really crossed paths that much when Windows NT began to rise up, and now, there's far too few Windows 98 active users where anyone would take the initiative, time, and energy required to make this undertaking.

Why anyone would want to subject a win-98 system to NTFS is beyond me. To take this even further, I make it a point to install XP on FAT-32 volumes (yes, even LARGE volumes with 4kb cluster size because it's a myth that cluster size has to increase ridiculously with volume size). It's very refreshing to have a dual-boot DOS7 / XP system and be able to browse your XP file system from a pure command shell.

Who (except for corporate or enterprise use) needs the extra baggage that NTFS gives? Permissions, user rights, files you can't delete or move around, hidden directories, root-kit compatibility, the performance hit from journalling. All for the birds. God help you if your MFT gets screwed up.

For the single user, non-administered, non networked, non-corporate PC, NTFS has no advantages over FAT32, and has some real disadvantages (cost and availability of partition recovery tools, for example).

Once upon a time, hard drives and associated drive controllers had some real reliability and performance issues. Automatic bad-sector detection and silent remapping in the drive didn't exist. But hard drives for the past, oh, 6 or 7 years are much better at bit-error rates and they also do bad-sector remapping. All that means that the auto-correction that NTFS was designed to do 10 to 15 years ago is no longer needed. FAT32 is just as "reliable" on todays hard drives as NTFS is. NTFS was designed partly to overcome the hard and soft errors that old drives were prone to experience. But those features are basically unnecessary on modern drives. The second primary goal of NTFS was file-system security in corporate or institutional settings (necessary to compete with unix systems). Again, that is completely unnecessary for the home/soho user.

Lack of stability, and the inability to have files greater than 4GB strikes me first.

Lack of stability is a myth.

Is the NTFS for Win98 Winternals V2 any good?
I really don't expect to write anything to a NTFS drive but you never know.
The read-only may be good.

I can't really remember too clearly, but I think that I DID try the Winternals NTFS for Windows 98, but I don't think that it was V2.... or maybe it was. I remember that it did need some real files from a legit Windows XP installation, but seemed to be quite stable. Although they said that it only has "Read-only" support, I think that it seemed that I could also write files to the NTFS drive (But I did not check whether the files were really written to the drive).

Also, I don't think that there was a problem with the recycle bin.

I tried it last year, and many details are quite hazy. So if anyone sees any incorrect information posted here by me, please correct me.


Yup, and if that was ever real, Windows 95/98 would not have become popular in it's year (Who buys an OS that causes you to lose data!?).

That's also my main use use of NTFS partitions. About 4 years ago I was thinking about creating a UDF partition on my internal HDD for files >4GB, but then I put that on a back burner.

UDF is supported by Win98 http://support.microsoft.com/kb/218617 [msconfig -> Advanced] and allows huge file sizes, one internet page mentions 128TB, wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_file_systems mentions "unknown". UDF is an open standard http://homepage.mac.com/wenguangwang/myhome/udf.html .

At that time I had briefly installed WriteDVD! v5.06, to format a HDD as UDF. I was also looking for Disk Drive TuneUp V3 but could not find it.
Here another link: http://www.raymond.cc/forum/software/11617...a-recorder.html
FixDVD!/FixUDF! for Win98/ME/NT/2000/XP still seems to be sold via Digital River http://www.softarch.com/EN/Product/FixDVDUDFWin.html

My concern 4 years ago was the scarcity of utilities supporting HDDs formatted as UDF. Perhaps there is also a way to format SDHC cards or USB sticks as UDF and a way to read and write big files on such UDF-formatted device under Win98.

I have been using UDF for some time even with IMGburn on windows 98. UDF seems really to be better solution for Windows 9x, but there is something else.

I was able to acess 8gb files, even write 8gb files with video creating program, but i was never able to copy such files even from NTFS to NTFS drive.

No matter what filesystem will be used this is limit in windows, at least for now.

So, NTFS is still a problem......and what about ExFat in Win98 - maybe this way is easier ??
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ExFAT

To my knowledge exFAT (FAT64) is available only for Windows 2000, XP, 2003, Vista, 2008 + 7 [look under "NEWS FLASH:"]:
http://www.mdgx.com/secrets.htm#FAT32
But some1 with driver level programming skills who can afford to spend a lot of time developing + testing this can probably make a native DOS driver, or even adapt the XP one [EXFAT.SYS], or at least make a VXD driver compatible with 9x OSes. [?]

As often happens, OFF-TOPIC, but not much :
How much money do you think these guys are making nowadays from selling this?:
http://www.techsoftpl.com/vxd/index.htm

at US$ 429 apiece?

http://www.techsoftpl.com/vxd/order.htm



Maybe if they would decide to "let go" that software or provide a "complimentary copy" a C programmer willing to take the challenge could even be found.

jaclaz

I doubt a free copy of VxDWriter would get meny people writing VxDs for Windows 9X.
I already write VxDs for Windows 9X without needing VxdWriter.
I have written a 64-Bit Memory VxD and am in the process of writing a Multi-Core VxD for Windows 9X.
Porting an undocumented Driver would be a lot more work.
I haven't seen enough interest in my exisiting VxDs to justify the much greater task of porting ExFAT or other XP Drivers.

Well, a man can dream, or not?

The point I was trying to make is that with the Win9x environment largely out of any kind of official support, ONLY hobbyists, a few "dinosaurs" and more generally NON-COMMERCIAL users are likely to still use it.

I bet that the revenues from very "vertical" apps, targeted exclusively to the unsupported/unused Windows platform are very near to 0.

A few "illuminated" companies/developers, no matter if because they are just "good guys" or because they actually keep their sales under control and found that it's several years they were able to sell a license for apps aimed to a Commercially non-existant target, stoppped their development and made them available freely, a few examples:
http://www.ardi.com/win_download.php
http://web.archive.org/web/20080308215648/...ft.com/ftp/sdd/
http://www.xp-smoker.com/98smoker.html
http://www.boot-land.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=752

On the other hand, there are episodes of what I cannot but consider commercially "stoopid" approaches:
http://www.911cd.net/forums//index.php?sho...12326&st=22
http://www.911cd.net/forums//index.php?sho...12326&st=39
Now that Neoware has been acquired by HP, it's allright, since they don't have to sell their products, and a nice thingy has been lost forever:
http://www.hp.com/hpinfo/newsroom/press/2007/071001xa.html


Sure, I don't doubt you have the knowledge to do that , only you won't do it or won't do it for free.
Please note that I do understand that it is exclusively your choice to write it, choose the license form and to have people pay for your software, but I am notoriously cheap.


Maybe, or maybe having a "C based" tool, would make it easier.



Exactly my point: not foreseeable income from the sales of such software.

jaclaz

I wrote my VxDs in pure Assembly to make them more streamlined and efficient. There is no reason that a small Assembly module cannot be combined with C Code to make a VxD. The original examples from Microsoft, I used to start writing my VxDs, are mixed C and Assembly Code.

Using C for a larger project would be easier, but most of the work in porting an existing Driver is reverse engineering the undocumented binaries.

Well, NO.
With SOME free stuff you may get that, with some other you can get MUCH more than with paid for solution: it's not the marketing model that makes the difference, it is the quality of the programs and the dedication of the programmers that make a difference.



But we do HAVE NTFS drivers with source: NTFS-3G, and the good guys at ReactOS before or later will release a working NTFS driver.
And exFAT is not that different from FAT32, for which driver source is available.

Sure it won't probably allow INSTALLING Win9x on such systems, but that would be rather pointless anyway.

jaclaz

I should have inserted "and/or" in the list. #3 does not apply to all programs.
The marketing model does determine whethger and how you pay for the product.
There are very few people creating quality free products without the other considerations I listed, so #1 still applies.



If it can't be installed, why write a driver for it?

I've been using version 2 for a while now and it works pretty well. You can copy/read files perfectly. You can even empty the recycle bin, no error yet.
Unlike version 1.x, it accepts XP files as dependancies. However, I've only been able to run the included checkdisk with NT files.

Cluster size limitation?
What exactly is that?

16 EB is hyperbole (even if true). I still don't trust any drives over 500 gb for reliability at this point.
And explain what exactly is the attraction of large cluster sizes - beyond 32 kb?
Why is the fallacy still being put forward that FAT32 volumes are limited to 2 to 4 million clusters? There is no such FAT32 limitation. I've run win-98 on volumes with 40 and even 120 million clusters (a 500 gb drive formatted as a single FAT32 partition with 120 million 4kb cluster-size).

Only 1,000? Doesn't fat32 allow for up to 64k files per directory - depending on the number of characters in the file name?

What exactly is that?

That's not a disadvantage. With journaling, data already written to open files is usually wiped out back to the last checkpoint. Any time my NT4 server goes down, I can count on that day's IIS log file to be wiped out. Thanks for the journalling. And thanks for the extra wear and tear on the drive itself.