On 28-3-2013 13:12, Warp wrote:
> Orchid Win7 v1 <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
>> It's official. I am no longer FAT32.
>
> Why did you wait so long?

LOL.
Either you did not get the joke or ignored it for humorous effect.


> FAT32 was ok when hard disk sizes were under 1GB. Nodadays when a normal
> HD which you get with a new PC is at least 500GB, FAT32 is extremely
> inefficient. It has the problem that the larger the partition is, the
> more space FAT32 wastes on it. It's also extremely slow for many operations
> on disks of those sizes. (Defragmenting would be the quintessential example.
> While defragmenting a 500GB NTFS partition full of files could take
> something like 15-30 minutes, if it's a FAT32 partition, it could take
> something like 15-30 hours. And that's no exaggeration.) It also has a file
> size limit of 4GB.




-- 
Women are the canaries of science. When they are underrepresented
it is a strong indication that non-scientific factors play a role
and the concentration of incorruptible scientists is also too low

Post a reply to this message