Skip to main content

Topic: ntfs or fat32 for media library (Read 10343 times) previous topic - next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
ntfs or fat32 for media library
Running XP, not concerned about compatability with other OSs.

Added a new External (firewire) HD to store/play my media library.

Any recommendation on fat32 or ntfs?

thanks.

  • SallyDog
  • [*]
ntfs or fat32 for media library
Reply #1
Running XP, not concerned about compatability with other OSs.

Added a new External (firewire) HD to store/play my media library.

Any recommendation on fat32 or ntfs?

thanks.

ntfs

ntfs or fat32 for media library
Reply #2
If you plan on storing files that are larger than 4GB then go with NTFS.  FAT32 is compatible with more OS's such as Windows 98, XP, Vista, the Xbox 360, and the PS3.  NTFS is basically only compatible with Windows 2000, XP, and Vista.

For pure music purposes FAT32 wouldn't be bad but you should use NTFS if you plan on storing videos.

  • m_l
  • [*][*]
ntfs or fat32 for media library
Reply #3
I use FAT32, for compatibility, but since that's not an issue with you go with NTFS.
  • Last Edit: 31 January, 2008, 02:26:36 AM by m_l

  • Emon
  • [*][*][*]
ntfs or fat32 for media library
Reply #4
NTFS works well under Linux with NTFS-3G, just for the record. It supports full read and write, but I'm not sure if journaling is there yet.

Anyways, if compatibility isn't an issue, always go with NTFS. There is no reason for FAT32 other than compatibility.

  • xmixahlx
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
ntfs or fat32 for media library
Reply #5

  • LANjackal
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
ntfs or fat32 for media library
Reply #6
Running XP, not concerned about compatability with other OSs.
NTFS all the way, no question.
EAC>1)fb2k>LAME3.99 -V 0 --vbr-new>WMP12 2)MAC-Extra High

  • j7n
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
ntfs or fat32 for media library
Reply #7
Maybe you will be concerned about compatibility with another computer in the future, since it's an external disk? I could say the only need for NTFS is when you're gonna have files larger than 4 GB. I don't see it happening in music storage, even when having Audio DVD.

  • Emon
  • [*][*][*]
ntfs or fat32 for media library
Reply #8
Yeah, the only need other than vastly increased speed, stability, and security, sure.

  • Gow
  • [*][*][*]
ntfs or fat32 for media library
Reply #9
NTFS, even Linux supports it now through a program, so compatibility issues are no longer a problem now or in the future.  After all, Microsoft will soon implement WinFS, so NTFS is not going to change.
Zune 80, Tak -p4 audio library, Lossless=Choice

  • hybridfan
  • [*][*][*]
ntfs or fat32 for media library
Reply #10
NTFS for sure
:Foobar 2000:
:MPC --standard:
:iRiver H320 Rockboxed:

  • SamHain86
  • [*][*][*][*]
ntfs or fat32 for media library
Reply #11
ext2ifs = http://www.fs-driver.org

I have read somewhere about the insecurity of the FAT32 file system to errors, from power failure and the like. In contrast then, heard the superiority of NTFS. I haven't enough technical knowledge to look for credible sources that can specify to me.

EXT2, how resilient is that against unexpected errors. Any advice?
OP can't edit initial post when a solution is determined  :'-(

  • Ardax
  • [*][*][*]
ntfs or fat32 for media library
Reply #12
Running XP, not concerned about compatability with other OSs.

NTFS.  Do not pass Go.  Do not collect $200.

If you need direct compatability with other major OSes, FUSE+NTFS-3g is a very good solution, including MacOS.  Even still, you may just be able to share the files from your current system.

  • Zastai
  • [*]
ntfs or fat32 for media library
Reply #13
It depends on how many machines you will be connecting the drive to. I've had some very bad experiences with the use of NTFS on external drives - Windows seems to be quite happy to corrupt the file system if the USB ports/cables/controller aren't all of the very highest quality. In particular, transferring files directly between external disks is likely to hose the target drive's filesystem.
FAT32 is out if you need huge partitions or large files; for most other uses it's not bad (if you're paranoid about data security you can always create a set of PARs for each folder). And if you have a PS3, it's the ideal choice for transferring media from your PC.
Other options may exist, like that ext2 driver - but you'd have to bring along the driver if you wanted to connect the disk to a standard Windows PC, so it's probably not as convenient.

  • Gow
  • [*][*][*]
ntfs or fat32 for media library
Reply #14
In contrast then, heard the superiority of NTFS. I haven't enough technical knowledge to look for credible sources that can specify to me.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NTFS
http://www.ntfs.com/
http://technet2.microsoft.com/windowsserve...3.mspx?mfr=true
Zune 80, Tak -p4 audio library, Lossless=Choice

  • Bourne
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Banned
ntfs or fat32 for media library
Reply #15
THEY SAY that huge cluster sizes will make reading-writting fast. Up to 32GB, a FAT32 filesystem can produce automatically 32k clustersize, against default-4k in NTFS filesystems.

I personally did not EVER notice any improvements of 64k/FAT32 clusters on NTFS/4k. There is an option to make NTFS with larger clusters but I don't think that would bring any improvement as well.

I'd say you should stick with NTFS because it support larger drives (FAT32 can support partitions up to 32GB only). That's the pretty much default for these days.

  • j7n
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
ntfs or fat32 for media library
Reply #16
I'd say you should stick with NTFS because it support larger drives (FAT32 can support partitions up to 32GB only). That's the pretty much default for these days.

Don't speak nonsense. Even on retail Win98 without updates you can have 127 GB partitions. Properly patched Win98 can work with 1 TB, WinNT5 can also mount 1 or 2 TB partitions.

The 32 Gig limit was put in WinNT5 disk formatting routine to make FAT32 look worse than it is.

  • JunkieXL
  • [*][*][*][*]
ntfs or fat32 for media library
Reply #17
Yeah, where are you getting that info from Bourne?

I think the general census (which means everyone) would recommend NTFS.
JXL

ntfs or fat32 for media library
Reply #18
Doesn't FAT32 have a 4GB file size limit? Granted, if all you are storing is music, that is not a big deal.
Dissent!

  • TREX6662k6
  • [*][*][*][*]
ntfs or fat32 for media library
Reply #19
The 32 Gig limit was put in WinNT5 disk formatting routine to make FAT32 look worse than it is.


Bingo. Inorder to format some drives, I had to use the commandline.

Recommend NTFS. Support for over 4GB files is a necessity.
I would have thought if a file system was to get corrupted it would be FAT32 with the higher chance since NTFS is journal-ed.

  • tgoose
  • [*][*][*][*]
ntfs or fat32 for media library
Reply #20
I had big issues with a Maxtor external drive and NTFS. It was a known issue and there were workarounds, but I still lost some data. Now I just use ext3 for storage so I don't need to worry about anything. I have a drive with HFS+, NTFS and FAT partitions for transferring stuff to other OSes but I don't need it very often.

  • Bourne
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Banned
ntfs or fat32 for media library
Reply #21
I ain't talking non-sense... I am saying what users will face when trying to format 100GB drive with FAT32. There is a workaround but I'm not sure how you will end up with the clusters or if that would compromise the whole performance. I'm sure there are "limitations" and "workarounds" and people will eventually avoid workarounds.

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/314463/EN-US

  • odious_m
  • [*][*]
ntfs or fat32 for media library
Reply #22
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/314463/EN-US


Thanks for the link.  MS states, "The maximum (FAT32) disk size is approximately 8 terabytes . . . " 

(FAT32 can support partitions up to 32GB only).


Maybe you should read it.

  • SamHain86
  • [*][*][*][*]
ntfs or fat32 for media library
Reply #23
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NTFS
http://www.ntfs.com/
http://technet2.microsoft.com/windowsserve...3.mspx?mfr=true
Thansk for the links, however, as I read really really slow, the only highlights I got out of it is that journaling seems to be really really good, NTFS supports while EXT2 doesn't support it. EXT3, the successor does. However, can that EXT2 work around work with EXT3 partitions?
OP can't edit initial post when a solution is determined  :'-(

  • washu
  • [*][*][*]
ntfs or fat32 for media library
Reply #24
Thansk for the links, however, as I read really really slow, the only highlights I got out of it is that journaling seems to be really really good, NTFS supports while EXT2 doesn't support it. EXT3, the successor does. However, can that EXT2 work around work with EXT3 partitions?


Anything that can mount EXT2 can mount EXT3.  The only difference is that the journaling feature will not be used.