Jump to content
Strawberry Orange Banana Lime Leaf Slate Sky Blueberry Grape Watermelon Chocolate Marble
Strawberry Orange Banana Lime Leaf Slate Sky Blueberry Grape Watermelon Chocolate Marble

MSFN is made available via donations, subscriptions and advertising revenue. The use of ad-blocking software hurts the site. Please disable ad-blocking software or set an exception for MSFN. Alternatively, register and become a site sponsor/subscriber and ads will be disabled automatically. 



bsperan

NTFS support in Win 98/SE/ME?

Recommended Posts

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).
True. FAT32 is very flexible and has wide limits. But going above 26 million clusters limits its usability because most of the available programs to give it maintenance weren't written to support so many clusters, as discussed elsewhere:
...and you'd surely have read this post and the ones it links to, so you wouldn't be surprised, as ScanDskW and Defrag (both from Win ME, provided one also uses DiskMaint.dll from Win ME) are known to work OK with up to slightly above 850 GB partitions (= 26,389,392 clusters of 32 kiB ).

You can double these limits, for Windows SCANDISK only, by using 64KiB Clusters, but you cannot use such a partition as a boot drive or with some older 16-Bit Programs including DOS SCANDISK

128KiB Clusters will raise the limit to the full 2TiB using Patched Filesystem Drivers..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest wsxedcrfv
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).
True. FAT32 is very flexible and has wide limits. But going above 26 million clusters limits its usability because most of the available programs to give it maintenance weren't written to support so many clusters, as discussed elsewhere:

Most people don't talk about these issues with regard to win-9x. The idea that FAT32 has cluster-size or cluster-count limitations with regard to drive maintenance tools don't really apply to the typical use-case where the OS is XP or higher. I've installed and run XP on FAT32 volumes where I manually pre-formatted the drive (250 gb) with third-party tools such that the volume was 250 gb, 4kb cluster size. XP had no problems being installed on and running from such a volume, nor maintaining it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest wsxedcrfv
All I'm saying is that FAT64 should be implemented in 9x OSes if possible *and* feasible.

I don't understand why, given my experience with large drives and the use of non-standard (but perfectly valid) cluster size. What can you do with win-9x and FAT64 that you couldn't do FAT32? I would NEVER use a 64kb cluster size anyways for a volume (especially c:) and I rarely use 32 kb as it is.

What I'd like to see is someone hack format.com to remove the /z: handicap.

The /z: parameter is supposed to let you specify a cluster size (in increments of 512 bytes). But format checks the values and won't let you enter a non-standard parameter anyways, which makes the /z switch completely useless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
According to this Wikipedia page:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ExFAT

one needs a Microsoft license to distribute FAT64 software/drivers/etc. :(

I have not checked to see if this license is free or not.

If any1 knows more on this subject, please post here.

The "source" for that Wikipedia is this page (that doesn't work in Opera) :whistle::

http://www.microsoft.com/iplicensing/produ...nsing%20Program

compare it with the "known" FAT one:

http://www.microsoft.com/iplicensing/produ...20File%20System

Try searching for "Any" in category "Filesystem":

Showing 1 results for your search criteria.

FAT File System

.....

The good guys at MS have "queer" ways....

I will cite this from the benefits :w00t: of FAT:

Title

FAT File System

Benefits

  • The FAT File System provides a way to time stamp when a file is created or changed, as well as to identify the size of the file.
  • This system provides a mechanism to store other attributes of a file, such as whether a file is read-only, whether the file should be hidden in a directory display, or whether a file should be archived during the next disk backup.
  • The FAT File System is ideal for removable flash media used in consumer electronic devices, such as digital cameras, media players, flash drives, and so on.

Definitely CP/M filesystem appears a bit dated when we see the first two "benefits" :whistling:

Remember to take your time reading "Resources" and expecially "FAQ's" ....

Isn't it unusual that you have a FAQ section but apparently nowhere to submit a question? :unsure:

:P

jaclaz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There are very few people creating quality free products without the other considerations I listed, so #1 still applies.

You must have missed the entire free and open-source community.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Use the XP ones. I have used both the XP and Server2k3 ones. Read the instructions carefully or it won't work. I have also "started" the "service" at Windows Startup. Can't remember exactly how I had it all set up (used the previous version).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The "source" for that Wikipedia is this page (that doesn't work in Opera) :

http://www.microsoft.com/iplicensing/produ...nsing%20Program

BTW, this page doesn't function properly with Firefox 3.5.5 either [links in tabs don't work]. Seems it requires MS IE. Another "brilliant" implementation of MS proprietary "standards"? :(

Thanks for pointing it out.

Unfortunately MS fee [they don't post the actual amount of money, but I'm sure it's a hefty one] are the show stopper. :(

And looks like MS will make a lot of money from this license, because soon SDXC memory cards/sticks will need exFAT support:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ExFAT#Disadvantages

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Unfortunately MS fee [they don't post the actual amount of money, but I'm sure it's a hefty one] are the show stopper. :(

Well, not really. :blink:

Just like the known FAT issues, it is still to be proved AT LEAST:

a. that the technology is licensable

b. that writing a driver for interchange with other systems is infringing any patent, copyright or any other Law, and it is NOT covered by the "fair use" provisions

Microsoft licensing (and eventual lawsuits) are NOT aimed to the developers of a driver, but rather on large corporations making use of the filesystem on their hardware devices.

AFAIK, Microsoft patents on FAT have been confirmed in the U.S. and rejected in Europe.

jaclaz

Edited by jaclaz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just like the known FAT issues, it is still to be proved AT LEAST:

a. that the technology is licensable

b. that writing a driver for interchange with other systems is infringing any patent, copyright or any other Law, and it is NOT covered by the "fair use" provisions

Microsoft licensing (and eventual lawsuits) are NOT aimed to the developers of a driver, but rather on large corporations making use of the filesystem on their hardware devices.

AFAIK, Microsoft patents on FAT have been confirmed in the U.S. and rejected in Europe.

jaclaz

If that means we have [a small] chance some1 would like to volunteer to develop exFAT drivers, that would be awesome! ;)

But if that requires to pay for licensing, and implicitly charge for the drivers, thanks, but no thanks. :(

Because a boatload of new devices will be released in the near future, I'm hoping:

a. Either MS will relax the licensing issue, and *if* that happens, maybe a Linux developer can create a nix driver. In that case, I'm assuming it should be fairly easy to port such *nix driver to native DOS environment or even Win9x.

b. Better, maybe some1 can develop their own exFAT driver [outside US] without having to go thru the MS license/patent process, and therefore that driver should be distributed for free [GPL?].

So... any volunteers? :whistle:

Just my 2 ¢ ...

[rant]

Patent on FAT? Sure, why not? Let's also patent the air we breathe.

[/rant]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Use the XP ones. I have used both the XP and Server2k3 ones. Read the instructions carefully or it won't work. I have also "started" the "service" at Windows Startup. Can't remember exactly how I had it all set up (used the previous version).

Can you specify from which service pack please. WinXP SP1 SP2 SP3.Thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest wsxedcrfv
If that means we have [a small] chance some1 would like to volunteer to develop exFAT drivers, that would be awesome! ;)

Please explain the practical benefits of exFAT over FAT32 with regard to Win-98.

Will Win-98's (or win-ME's) native drive maintenance tools function on exFAT-formatted volumes?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Please explain the practical benefits of exFAT over FAT32 with regard to Win-98.

As I see it the only advantage would be that of having files bigger than 4 Gb:

http://www.ntfs.com/ntfs_vs_fat.htm

With all due respect for the people asking for NTFS support, the only practical use of NTFS on Windows 9x is IMHO for easily exchange of files in NT/2k/Xp/2003/Vista/2008/7 multi-boot systems or as a quick recovery system, as it seems to me that all the "advanced" features of NTFS (permissions, quotas, etc.) are pretty much useless in a 9x system which is not intneded/used as "multi-user" or server.

Will Win-98's (or win-ME's) native drive maintenance tools function on exFAT-formatted volumes?

They definitely won't, but one could write new ones as well.

jaclaz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding Paragon NTFS for Win98, it is now free, though it requires registration for downloading. I've been using it for quite a while and have had no issues, but I've kept away from 4GB+ files aswell...

If I had more time and looked into windows programming, and knew C/C++, I'd be more than häppy to help with some file system driver. ASM + DOS works for me though, but my x86 is not half as good as my Z80 and 680x0 are :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×