On Fri, 06 Sep 2013 17:01:44 -0400, Francois Labreque wrote:

> 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?

Because when the code was written, it was written.  To extend the 
limitation requires more code be written.  To support that extra space in 
other applications requires testing and QA.

Have you worked in a software company?  Do you know how software 
development and QA is done?

Even a /minor/ change to the code (say to make disk space reports not 
turn up negative numbers) requires regression testing to make sure it 
doesn't break anything else.  *Trivial* stuff being fixed, done by large 
software companies, certainly, is not actually a trivial thing.

>>> 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.

Well, MS doesn't always get to win.  In the end, in spite of the 
limitations and problems (and I'm speaking as a user of Linux on the 
desktop since the late 90's), Microsoft ain't going anywhere, and people 
are going to just continue to use it, warts and all.

Jim

Post a reply to this message