Le 2013-09-06 11:50, Jim Henderson a écrit :
> On Fri, 06 Sep 2013 08:48:07 -0400, Francois Labreque wrote:
>
>> Le 2013-09-05 12:41, Jim Henderson a écrit :
>>> On Thu, 05 Sep 2013 09:30:56 -0400, Francois Labreque wrote:
>>>
>>>> FAT32 can go up to 2TB with 512b sectors and 16TB with 4k sectors.
>>>> There are lots of utilities that will allow you to format a disk >16GB
>>>> with FAT32, but Windows insists on allowing only NTFS for anything
>>>> greater than 16GB.
>>>>
>>>> So it is indeed Microsoft adopting a "Father knows best" attitude.
>>>
>>> FAT32 is MS' filesystem, so they get to decide what features to
>>> support. Like many companies, they probably want the older stuff to go
>>> away, and this is one way of making that happen.
>>>
>>> Supporting old and outdated technology is expensive, and even a company
>>> as large as Microsoft has to watch what their operating expenses are.
>>>
>>>
>> Where are they saving money?  The code to fdisk a drive with FAT32 is
>> still there in the code.  In fact, they had to write even more code to
>> check the size of the disk before deciding if they would make FAT32 one
>> of the available formats.
>
> I would guess that they need fewer staff to support fat32, fewer
> developers to maintain it, fewer testers to test it, etc.  It all adds up.
>

Why would they need fewer people to support FAT32 by arbitrarily 
limiting the size of the drives you can use it on to 1/1000th of its 
full potential?

> It's not a question of "letting" users do things, it's a question of
> making a financial decision to go a particular way.  They must not see a
> lot of profit in "fixing" this, because if they did, you can be sure that
> as a business that wants to make money, they'd be on it if there was
> money to be made in it.
>
>> As for this particular instance, it's no longer an issue.  My employer
>> has forced all of us off Windows and onto OSX or Linux, for security
>> reasons, and I have no problem formatting disks there.
>
> See?  Problem solved. :)
>

Probably not in the way MS expected, though.


-- 
/*Francois Labreque*/#local a=x+y;#local b=x+a;#local c=a+b;#macro P(F//
/*    flabreque    */L)polygon{5,F,F+z,L+z,L,F pigment{rgb 9}}#end union
/*        @        */{P(0,a)P(a,b)P(b,c)P(2*a,2*b)P(2*b,b+c)P(b+c,<2,3>)
/*   gmail.com     */}camera{orthographic location<6,1.25,-6>look_at a }

Post a reply to this message