XP NT file system and sims?

Any reasons for or against using the NT file system in XP over the regular Windows (FAT) system with regards to racing sims (compatibility, speed, ... other?). Thanks, Russell

If you don't know how the file system works don't use it.

A few sims may not run, but most will run perfectly fine. ANything current should work fine, GPL requires disk indexing to be turned on for at least the GPL folder, VROC requires you to rename riched20.dll or it errors. Truthfully IMHO, if you're not going to use NTFS, there aren't alot of good reasons to even bother with an NT based OS in the first place since you lose most of OS security without it. -- Biz "Don't touch that please, your primitive intellect wouldn't understand alloys and compositions and,......things with molecular structures,....and the....." - Ash R Keating <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:amqmmu$lc9$[email hidden]... > Any reasons for or against using the NT file system in XP over the regular > Windows (FAT) > system with regards to racing sims (compatibility, speed, ... other?). > > Thanks, > Russell > >

The reason to use an NT based OS can be stability. It works very well with FAT 32 and most home users do not need to encrypt and protect individual folders. It is also much more resistant to virus since they can not become memory resident. Use your XP with Fat32 unless you want to hide sensitive files. "Biz" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:2y5k9.62382$[email hidden]... > A few sims may not run, but most will run perfectly fine. ANythingcurrent should work fine, GPL > requires disk indexing to be turned on for at least the GPL folder, VROCrequires you to rename > riched20.dll or it errors. Truthfully IMHO, if you're not going to useNTFS, there aren't alot of > good reasons to even bother with an NT based OS in the first place sinceyou lose most of OS

Quoted text (10 lines)

> security without it. > -- > Biz > > "Don't touch that please, your primitive intellect wouldn't understand > alloys and compositions and,......things with molecular structures,....and > the....." - Ash > > > R Keating <[email hidden]> wrote in message

news:amqmmu$lc9$[email hidden]... > > Any reasons for or against using the NT file system in XP over theregular

Quoted text (9 lines)

> > Windows (FAT) > > system with regards to racing sims (compatibility, speed, ... other?). > > > > Thanks, > > Russell > > > > > >

No, use XP with NTFS if you do not have any special reason not to. A special reason could be dual booting. I have even dug up a link from microsoft if you want to get further advices ;-) http://www.microsoft.com/technet/treeview/default.asp?url=/technet/prodtechn ol/winntas/tips/techrep/filesyst.asp /Carl "Conga" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:Xm8k9.99070$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (23 lines)

> The reason to use an NT based OS can be stability. It works very well with > FAT 32 and most home users do not need to encrypt and protect individual > folders. > > It is also much more resistant to virus since they can not become memory > resident. Use your XP with Fat32 unless you want to hide sensitive files. > > "Biz" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:2y5k9.62382$[email hidden]... > > A few sims may not run, but most will run perfectly fine. ANything > current should work fine, GPL > > requires disk indexing to be turned on for at least the GPL folder, VROC > requires you to rename > > riched20.dll or it errors. Truthfully IMHO, if you're not going to use > NTFS, there aren't alot of > > good reasons to even bother with an NT based OS in the first place since > you lose most of OS > > security without it. > > -- > > Biz > > > > "Don't touch that please, your primitive intellect wouldn't understand > > alloys and compositions and,......things with molecular

structures,....and

Quoted text (18 lines)

> > the....." - Ash > > > > > > R Keating <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:amqmmu$lc9$[email hidden]... > > > Any reasons for or against using the NT file system in XP over the > regular > > > Windows (FAT) > > > system with regards to racing sims (compatibility, speed, ... other?). > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Russell > > > > > > > > > > > >

Please disregard the part of the article where it tells you to make a boot partition in Fat. That is not valid anymore, since 2000/XP has a recovery console. MS reccomendation is 100% NTFS I don't have time to search for more MS articles right now, but please check out www.microsoft.com/technet on your own. /Carl "Carl Ribbegaardh" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:amrhno$8hm3l$[email hidden]... > No, use XP with NTFS if you do not have any special reason not to. Aspecial > reason could be dual booting. > > I have even dug up a link from microsoft if you want to get furtheradvices > ;-) >http://www.microsoft.com/technet/treeview/default.asp?url=/technet/prodtechn

Quoted text (7 lines)

> ol/winntas/tips/techrep/filesyst.asp > > /Carl > > "Conga" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:Xm8k9.99070$[email hidden]... > > The reason to use an NT based OS can be stability. It works very well

with > > FAT 32 and most home users do not need to encrypt and protect individual > > folders. > > > > It is also much more resistant to virus since they can not become memory > > resident. Use your XP with Fat32 unless you want to hide sensitivefiles. > > > > "Biz" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:2y5k9.62382$[email hidden]... > > > A few sims may not run, but most will run perfectly fine. ANything > > current should work fine, GPL > > > requires disk indexing to be turned on for at least the GPL folder,VROC > > requires you to rename > > > riched20.dll or it errors. Truthfully IMHO, if you're not going touse > > NTFS, there aren't alot of > > > good reasons to even bother with an NT based OS in the first placesince

Quoted text (17 lines)

> > you lose most of OS > > > security without it. > > > -- > > > Biz > > > > > > "Don't touch that please, your primitive intellect wouldn't understand > > > alloys and compositions and,......things with molecular > structures,....and > > > the....." - Ash > > > > > > > > > R Keating <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:amqmmu$lc9$[email hidden]... > > > > Any reasons for or against using the NT file system in XP over the > > regular > > > > Windows (FAT) > > > > system with regards to racing sims (compatibility, speed, ...

other?).

Quoted text (11 lines)

> > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > Russell > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

"Carl Ribbegaardh" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:amrhto$8bivs$[email hidden]... > MS reccomendation is 100% NTFS NTFS made me a lot of money once when a client's MBR became corrupted. All of his emails and digital photos... none of it backed up. NTFS stores a backup copy that can be recovered with a disk editor (and I believe there's a MS tool to do this as well) in just a few miuntes. I think I made about $500 for that hour :) Also NTFS is a journaled filesystem making it quite unusual to lose data if you have a system crash. I had a problem with a bad driver that was crashing my system about 5 times a day for a week. I never lost a single file in nearly 25 crashes. In fact, I can't remember the last time I had a corrupted file following a crash. That's a good enough reason for me to run NTFS on all my systems. Dale.

I doubt whether most of us know how FAT32 "works" any more than how NTFS works. Russell: I've installed F12002 (and GP4, briefly) on both, and have noticed no performance difference. I've heard that NTFS drives can slow down noticeably when near full, though, so if space is a consideration, maybe FAT32 is better. Jacques "Conga" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:ai5k9.97954$[email hidden]... > If you don't know how the file system works don't use it. > >

Works fine here... -Larry "R Keating" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:amqmmu$lc9$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (8 lines)

> Any reasons for or against using the NT file system in XP over the regular > Windows (FAT) > system with regards to racing sims (compatibility, speed, ... other?). > > Thanks, > Russell > >

You would have no reason to go back to FAT-32. NTFS is your friend... -Larry "Dameon" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > On Wed, 25 Sep 2002 01:03:35 -0700, "Dale Green" > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > > >NTFS made me a lot of money once when a client's MBR became corrupted.All > >of his emails and digital photos... none of it backed up. NTFS stores a > >backup copy that can be recovered with a disk editor (and I believethere's > >a MS tool to do this as well) in just a few miuntes. I think I madeabout > >$500 for that hour :) > > > >Also NTFS is a journaled filesystem making it quite unusual to lose dataif > >you have a system crash. I had a problem with a bad driver that was > >crashing my system about 5 times a day for a week. I never lost a single > >file in nearly 25 crashes. In fact, I can't remember the last time I hada

Quoted text (15 lines)

> >corrupted file following a crash. > > > >That's a good enough reason for me to run NTFS on all my systems. > > > >Dale. > > > > Yea, but the question was NTFS and *sims*, not NTFS and file > protection. For a gamer I say stick with FAT32, more compatibility and > is slightly faster according to articles I have read. Once you go NTFS > it is more of a pain to reformat back to FAT32 if you should ever > want/need to go back to Win9x. You need to destroy the NTFS partition > before you can go back to FAT32. With FAT32 no such malarky is needed. > One can easily get 3rd party encryption utilities for free if you want > to secure files and folders under FAT32.

Exactly :-) "Larry" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:Empk9.28416$[email hidden]... > You would have no reason to go back to FAT-32. > > NTFS is your friend... > > -Larry >

On Wed, 25 Sep 2002 20:52:52 GMT, "Larry" <[email hidden]> wrote somtehing like this: >You would have no reason to go back to FAT-32. > >NTFS is your friend... NTFS has worked fine for me too. Every game and sim works as well as on FAT32. Maybe there is a noticeable performance difference between FAT32 and NTFS on slow machines that can't run games properly anyway... I sure didn't notice any difference in games on my P3-733 @ 880MHz machine. I recently reinstalled WinXP on my machine, and I installed it on FAT32 just to see if it would give some sort of performance boost. It didn't, so I converted the disk to NTFS. I've had some troubles with corrupted allocation tables on FAT partitions before, so I try to stay away from it :) NTFS is somewhat faster than FAT32 in reading/writing large files 'cause it reads the data in larger portions. With lots of small files FAT32 is a little faster... BTW, NTFS partitions can be converted to FAT32 eg. with Partition Magic. -- - Igor -

On Thu, 26 Sep 2002 04:56:43 -0400, Dameon <[email hidden]> wrote something like this:

Quoted text (8 lines)

>On Thu, 26 Sep 2002 07:08:03 GMT, Jussi 'Igor' Koukku <[email hidden]> >wrote: > >>NTFS has worked fine for me too. Every game and sim works as well as >>on FAT32. > >How many games do you own? Not every sim/game will work on XP even >with FAT32 so why lower your odds with NTFS?

Haven't counted my games, but there are plenty. What I meant to say was that every game and sim that I have tried, and that worked on WinXP, worked regardless of the file system. I guess I should have read what I wrote one more time... What sims do you own that run on WinXP with FAT32, but won't run with NTFS? >>BTW, NTFS partitions can be converted to FAT32 eg. with Partition >>Magic. > >I don't want or need to pay big bucks for a partitioning utility. I >used to own PM but that version became obsolete and I'm not spending >another $100.00 CAD for it. I just stated the fact that it can be done if necessary. -- - Igor -

"Dameon" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (11 lines)

> On Wed, 25 Sep 2002 20:52:52 GMT, "Larry" <[email hidden]> wrote: > > > >NTFS is your friend... > > > >-Larry > > Sure Larry, that's why I spent frustrating time trying to get GPL to > run on NTFS. I know what the issue was now but back then no one knew > why I couldn't get it to run. If Iwas using FAT32 I would have had no > such problem.

I guess the problem was that you didn't have rights to write to the folder, right? > And there are games out there that won't even install if > you are using NTFS. With XP I need all the game compatibility I can > get and thowing NTFS into the mix is folly if you are a gamer. And I > don't mean someone who runs a few racing titles. What game will not install on NTFS? /Carl

I have over 50 games, and not one of them has had an issue with NTFS. -Larry "Dameon" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (17 lines)

> On Thu, 26 Sep 2002 07:08:03 GMT, Jussi 'Igor' Koukku <[email hidden]> > wrote: > > > >NTFS has worked fine for me too. Every game and sim works as well as > >on FAT32. > > How many games do you own? Not every sim/game will work on XP even > with FAT32 so why lower your odds with NTFS? > > > >BTW, NTFS partitions can be converted to FAT32 eg. with Partition > >Magic. > > I don't want or need to pay big bucks for a partitioning utility. I > used to own PM but that version became obsolete and I'm not spending > another $100.00 CAD for it.

Again, I've got like 50 games and none of them have ever had an issue with NTFS. Including GPL. It's always worked fine for me on an NTFS system. -Larry "Dameon" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (14 lines)

> On Wed, 25 Sep 2002 20:52:52 GMT, "Larry" <[email hidden]> wrote: > > > >NTFS is your friend... > > > >-Larry > > Sure Larry, that's why I spent frustrating time trying to get GPL to > run on NTFS. I know what the issue was now but back then no one knew > why I couldn't get it to run. If Iwas using FAT32 I would have had no > such problem. And there are games out there that won't even install if > you are using NTFS. With XP I need all the game compatibility I can > get and thowing NTFS into the mix is folly if you are a gamer. And I > don't mean someone who runs a few racing titles.

"Dameon" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > On Thu, 26 Sep 2002 19:31:03 +0200, "Carl Ribbegaardh" > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > > >I guess the problem was that you didn't have rights to write to thefolder,

Quoted text (7 lines)

> >right? > > No. I had turned off indexing and GPL will not install to an NTFS > system if you turn it off. Strange, but true. That cost me a good hour > or two in troubleshooting and researching the problem. Hours of my > life that are forever lost and could have been spent doing something > more worthwhile.

ROFLMAO!!!!! I am running GPL on my XP pc, and I ran it under Win2k to. I've always had indexing disabled. Of course I'm using NTFS only. > >What game will not install on NTFS? > > http://www.ntcompatible.com/ Ok, so I cannot see that website if I'm using NTFS? ;-) Seriously, could you point me to a game which doesn't work with NTFS, but FAT on a Win2k/WinXP PC. Please back it up with some kind of proof. /Carl

I don't think indexing is the real problem. I don't know this for certain, because I am still running Win 98 at home; however a friend of mine had some difficulty setting up some games on his Win 2000 PC, and I asked him to try something to see if it would work. I had this feeling that the reason that indexing fixes some people's problems is that either NTFS or NT based OS's, much like Linux, do not automatically search the current directory like Win9x/DOS/FAT32 does. But many programs written for the latter system, including installers, assume that they can find things in the current directory without specifying the path. So they fail when run under an OS that doesn't support that. Indexing will prevent that from happening, but is not the best way to fix the problem. I asked my friend to try adding ".\" to the path environment variable, which should be the correct way under any MS OS to tell it to include the current directory in the search path. I also told him to try "./", "\.", and "/." just in case I didn't have the syntax right. Not sure which one he ended up with (probably the first one), but he did say that it fixed all of the problems he was having with games. And he did not need to turn on indexing after that. Again, I am not running this at home, so I can't tell you for sure which file you have to modify. In DOS/Windows it was always in \autoexec.bat, but I don't know where it gets set in NT based systems. Also, you will have to reboot afterwards for it to take effect. "Carl Ribbegaardh" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:an4b82$arl5p$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (12 lines)

> "Dameon" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > On Thu, 26 Sep 2002 19:31:03 +0200, "Carl Ribbegaardh" > > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > > > > > >I guess the problem was that you didn't have rights to write to the > folder, > > >right? > > > > No. I had turned off indexing and GPL will not install to an NTFS > > system if you turn it off. Strange, but true. That cost me a good

hour

Quoted text (16 lines)

> > or two in troubleshooting and researching the problem. Hours of my > > life that are forever lost and could have been spent doing something > > more worthwhile. > > ROFLMAO!!!!! > I am running GPL on my XP pc, and I ran it under Win2k to. > I've always had indexing disabled. > Of course I'm using NTFS only. > > > >What game will not install on NTFS? > > > > http://www.ntcompatible.com/ > > Ok, so I cannot see that website if I'm using NTFS? ;-) > > Seriously, could you point me to a game which doesn't work with NTFS,

but > FAT on a Win2k/WinXP PC. Please back it up with some kind of proof. > > /Carl > >

Indexing has nothing to do with the "current directory" you are talking about. Indexing is just a service that is used by the file-search engine to make file-searching faster. /Carl "Haqsau" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:an4je2$b3ntp$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (63 lines)

> I don't think indexing is the real problem. I don't know this for > certain, because I am still running Win 98 at home; however a friend of > mine had some difficulty setting up some games on his Win 2000 PC, and I > asked him to try something to see if it would work. I had this feeling > that the reason that indexing fixes some people's problems is that > either NTFS or NT based OS's, much like Linux, do not automatically > search the current directory like Win9x/DOS/FAT32 does. But many > programs written for the latter system, including installers, assume > that they can find things in the current directory without specifying > the path. So they fail when run under an OS that doesn't support that. > Indexing will prevent that from happening, but is not the best way to > fix the problem. I asked my friend to try adding ".\" to the path > environment variable, which should be the correct way under any MS OS to > tell it to include the current directory in the search path. I also > told him to try "./", "\.", and "/." just in case I didn't have the > syntax right. Not sure which one he ended up with (probably the first > one), but he did say that it fixed all of the problems he was having > with games. And he did not need to turn on indexing after that. Again, > I am not running this at home, so I can't tell you for sure which file > you have to modify. In DOS/Windows it was always in \autoexec.bat, but > I don't know where it gets set in NT based systems. Also, you will have > to reboot afterwards for it to take effect. > > > > "Carl Ribbegaardh" <[email hidden]> wrote in > message news:an4b82$arl5p$[email hidden]... > > "Dameon" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:[email hidden]... > > > On Thu, 26 Sep 2002 19:31:03 +0200, "Carl Ribbegaardh" > > > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > >I guess the problem was that you didn't have rights to write to the > > folder, > > > >right? > > > > > > No. I had turned off indexing and GPL will not install to an NTFS > > > system if you turn it off. Strange, but true. That cost me a good > hour > > > or two in troubleshooting and researching the problem. Hours of my > > > life that are forever lost and could have been spent doing something > > > more worthwhile. > > > > ROFLMAO!!!!! > > I am running GPL on my XP pc, and I ran it under Win2k to. > > I've always had indexing disabled. > > Of course I'm using NTFS only. > > > > > >What game will not install on NTFS? > > > > > > http://www.ntcompatible.com/ > > > > Ok, so I cannot see that website if I'm using NTFS? ;-) > > > > Seriously, could you point me to a game which doesn't work with NTFS, > but > > FAT on a Win2k/WinXP PC. Please back it up with some kind of proof. > > > > /Carl > > > > >

Dameon <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (12 lines)

> On Thu, 26 Sep 2002 19:31:03 +0200, "Carl Ribbegaardh" > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > > >I guess the problem was that you didn't have rights to write to the folder, > >right? > > No. I had turned off indexing and GPL will not install to an NTFS > system if you turn it off. Strange, but true. That cost me a good hour > or two in troubleshooting and researching the problem. Hours of my > life that are forever lost and could have been spent doing something > more worthwhile.

Hours of your life you probably would have wasted playing games or smoking dope instead? What a punk. -- Biz "Don't touch that please, your primitive intellect wouldn't understand alloys and compositions and,......things with molecular structures,....and the....." - Ash

Then why does it have any affect on programs? It appears to me like the OS is using indexing to locate files also. What I am trying to say is that if either NT based OSes or the NTFS file system imposes the "feature", like *nix systems, where the current directory (default directory if you prefer) is never automatically searched in response to a command to execute a program, then there will be no way for that OS to execute a program unless the command includes either an absolute or a relative path name, or unless it has some other method for finding files, such as an indexed file search service. And both games and installers are programs that are likely to assume that their resources are all in the current directory and therefore attempt to call them with an unqualified file name. I have never seen a Windows or DOS program refer to ".\myprogram.exe" instead of just "myprogram.exe". The former is technically correct, and necessary in most "real" OSes, but the latter was always allowed by DOS/Win9x. Anyway regardless of whether I'm right about the reason or not, the fact remains my friend fixed all of his problems by adding ".\" to his path variable, and has not had to turn on indexing for any program. So my reasoning might be flawed, but the fix still works. "Carl Ribbegaardh" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:an4kh8$au37v$[email hidden]... > Indexing has nothing to do with the "current directory" you aretalking > about. > Indexing is just a service that is used by the file-search engine tomake > file-searching faster. > > /Carl >

Check out this article: http://www.microsoft.com/technet/treeview/default.asp?url=/TechNet/prodtechn ol/winxppro/proddocs/path.asp?frame=true You can also easily test your theory by doing the following: 1. Open a commandprompt by typing cmd in the "run prompt" 2. In the cmd-window, execute the following (one row at a time): cd \ mkdir pathtest cd pathtest echo A little testfile > testfile.txt testfile.txt 3. If your testfile is opened, probably in notepad, your windows work like it should. What you did was the following; You moved to the root of a drive. Then you created a folder called pathtest, and moved into it. You wrote a textfile with the content "A little testfile", and finally opened it. 4 You can take this test a little further by continuing with the following. (make sure you are still in the pathtest folder) copy %windir%\system32\calc.exe notepad.exe notepad cd.. notepad 5 This test should do the following; First you copy the calculator but renaming the copy as notepad.exe in your current folder. Then you try to run notepad, but since there is a file with that name in the current directory windows will use that instead. This file is not a the notepad but rather the calculator, so windows will display the calculator copy. Then you exit the pathtest folder, placing you at the root of the drive. From the root path you execute the notepad application, and since the fake notepad-file doesn't exist in your current folder, the path environmantvalue is used to find the application :-) When you are done, delete the pathtest folder. Cheers /Carl "Haqsau" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:an5l9e$b86pp$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (33 lines)

> Then why does it have any affect on programs? It appears to me like the > OS is using indexing to locate files also. What I am trying to say is > that if either NT based OSes or the NTFS file system imposes the > "feature", like *nix systems, where the current directory (default > directory if you prefer) is never automatically searched in response to > a command to execute a program, then there will be no way for that OS to > execute a program unless the command includes either an absolute or a > relative path name, or unless it has some other method for finding > files, such as an indexed file search service. And both games and > installers are programs that are likely to assume that their resources > are all in the current directory and therefore attempt to call them with > an unqualified file name. I have never seen a Windows or DOS program > refer to ".\myprogram.exe" instead of just "myprogram.exe". The former > is technically correct, and necessary in most "real" OSes, but the > latter was always allowed by DOS/Win9x. Anyway regardless of whether > I'm right about the reason or not, the fact remains my friend fixed all > of his problems by adding ".\" to his path variable, and has not had to > turn on indexing for any program. So my reasoning might be flawed, but > the fix still works. > > "Carl Ribbegaardh" <[email hidden]> wrote in > message news:an4kh8$au37v$[email hidden]... > > Indexing has nothing to do with the "current directory" you are > talking > > about. > > Indexing is just a service that is used by the file-search engine to > make > > file-searching faster. > > > > /Carl > > > >

On Sat, 28 Sep 2002 09:16:42 -0400, Dameon <[email hidden]> wrote something like this: >gamers. NTFS is more secure, robust and defragments less, therefore; Defragments less? I seriously doubt it... fragmentation is IMO the biggest problem with NTFS. -- - Igor -

On Sat, 28 Sep 2002 09:05:12 -0400, Dameon <[email hidden]> wrote something like this:

Quoted text (9 lines)

>On Thu, 26 Sep 2002 10:29:14 GMT, Jussi 'Igor' Koukku <[email hidden]> >wrote: > >>What sims do you own that run on WinXP with FAT32, but won't run with >>NTFS? > >I can't remember exactly which ones now because I used NTFS once, and >once only. But I do remmeber some that complained about not being able >to install to WinNT. If you really want to search it out then go to

So the problem was the OS, not the file system? >the below url. NTFS clusters waste more disk space than FAT32 also and >considering the size of todays games I like to conserve as much of my >160gb as possible. I also use 20gb dedicated to Linux. On NTFS you can set the cluster size in spite of the partition size, something that can't be done with FAT32. And I can fit my OS, programs and games on a 10GB drive... that FAT32 must really be wasting your disk space ;) -- - Igor -

On Sat, 28 Sep 2002 09:05:51 -0400, Dameon <[email hidden]> wrote something like this:

Quoted text (7 lines)

>On Fri, 27 Sep 2002 14:30:08 GMT, "Larry" <[email hidden]> wrote: > >>I have over 50 games, and not one of them has had an issue with NTFS. >> >>-Larry > >Bully for you. My experience was otherwise.

You said you tried NTFS once, and that you couldn't install "some game" cause it complained about the OS being "WinNT"... some experience. -- - Igor -

I assume you are replying to Dameon ? -Larry "Jussi 'Igor' Koukku" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (16 lines)

> On Sat, 28 Sep 2002 09:05:51 -0400, Dameon <[email hidden]> > wrote something like this: > > >On Fri, 27 Sep 2002 14:30:08 GMT, "Larry" <[email hidden]> wrote: > > > >>I have over 50 games, and not one of them has had an issue with NTFS. > >> > >>-Larry > > > >Bully for you. My experience was otherwise. > > You said you tried NTFS once, and that you couldn't install "some > game" cause it complained about the OS being "WinNT"... some > experience. > -- > - Igor -

On Mon, 30 Sep 2002 19:59:33 GMT, "Larry" <[email hidden]> wrote something like this: >I assume you are replying to Dameon ? Yes, I was replying to Daemon's reply to you =) (that's why my reply was below his reply ;) -- - Igor -

I thought so, just wanted to be sure :) -Larry "Jussi 'Igor' Koukku" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (9 lines)

> On Mon, 30 Sep 2002 19:59:33 GMT, "Larry" <[email hidden]> wrote > something like this: > > >I assume you are replying to Dameon ? > > Yes, I was replying to Daemon's reply to you =) > (that's why my reply was below his reply ;) > -- > - Igor -

On Wed, 02 Oct 2002 11:27:22 -0400, Dameon <[email hidden]> wrote something like this:

Quoted text (8 lines)

>On Mon, 30 Sep 2002 07:24:50 GMT, Jussi 'Igor' Koukku <[email hidden]> >wrote: > >>Defragments less? I seriously doubt it... fragmentation is IMO the >>biggest problem with NTFS. > >Go look it up if you don't believe me. Unlke you, I've done my >research, And no, I'm not doing it for you.

Claiming that NTFS causes troubles with sims (or games in general) really shows the level of your so called research. But, you're right about the fragmentation, NTFS fragments less than FAT32 in general. I doubted it cause my personal experience was exactly the opposite. But as I was doing my "research" (=googling), I found out that on partitions that are 80-90% full, NTFS defragmentation gets worse. My 10GB drive is usually quite full as you might guess... time to move some more files to my "server" machine (=connection sharing, mp3 player etc) :) -- - Igor -

"Dameon" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > On Thu, 03 Oct 2002 07:24:25 GMT, Jussi 'Igor' Koukku <[email hidden]> > wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > And the below should shut you doubters up for good. If it doesn't then > all further posts will be ignored. > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/home/using/productdoc/en/default.asp?url= /WINDOWSXP/home/using/productdoc/en/choosing_between_NTFS_FAT_and_FAT32.asp > Note > > Some older programs may not run on an NTFS volume, so you should > research the current requirements for your software before converting. > Like older versions of PQ magic? 3rd party defragmenters for FAT volumes? Old norton utilities... I seriously doubt you will ever dig up a game that will not run on an NTFS partition if the game itself will run in XP. /Carl

On Thu, 3 Oct 2002 21:26:59 +0200, "Carl Ribbegaardh" <[email hidden]> wrote something like this: >I seriously doubt you will ever dig up a game that will not run on an NTFS >partition if the game itself will run in XP. Exactly what I have been trying to say, and I'm still waiting to be proven wrong. -- - Igor -

On Thu, 03 Oct 2002 14:45:05 -0400, Dameon <[email hidden]> wrote something like this: >Some older programs may not run on an NTFS volume, so you should >research the current requirements for your software before converting. The key word being "may". Give one example of a game (preferably a sim cause that's what the subject says, but a game will do) that runs on WinXP with FAT32, but won't run on WinXP with NTFS. -- - Igor -

On Thu, 03 Oct 2002 14:45:05 -0400, Dameon <[email hidden]> wrote something like this: >And the below should shut you doubters up for good. If it doesn't then >all further posts will be ignored. Oh, didn't notice you're trying to abandon a sinking ship ;) Feel free to ignore my replies. -- - Igor -

Dameon wrote:

Quoted text (9 lines)

> > And the below should shut you doubters up for good. If it doesn't then > all further posts will be ignored. > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/home/using/productdoc/en/default.asp?url=/WINDOWSXP/home/using/productdoc/en/choosing_between_NTFS_FAT_and_FAT32.asp > Note > > Some older programs may not run on an NTFS volume, so you should > research the current requirements for your software before converting.

And you believe everything MS tells you ? :-) They told us that IE could not be removed from W98 as it was "too integrated" in the OS, yet I'm running W98 without any sort of Web browser installed on my gaming PC, I'm sure we could find tons of other statements that are only "half truths" at best, such as "WinME is a stable OS" :-) That statement is just MS covering their backs, it may be true for all I know, but it's not *the* truth Beers and cheers (uncle) Goy "The Pits" http://www.theuspits.com/ "A man is only as old as the woman he feels" --Groucho Marx--

Not one sim, and how about a game from this century? The small percentage of people still playing those OLD DOS versions could easily get by with a DOS boot disk, which is probably best even under Win9X. -- Biz "Don't touch that please, your primitive intellect wouldn't understand alloys and compositions and,......things with molecular structures,....and the....." - Ash Dameon <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > On Fri, 04 Oct 2002 07:03:48 GMT, Jussi 'Igor' Koukku <[email hidden]> > wrote: > > > >Oh, didn't notice you're trying to abandon a sinking ship ;) Feel free > >to ignore my replies. > > Hehe.... > > http://21ct.goodolddays.net/rpg/ishar3.shtml > WinXP: Not tested yet, but I have gotten a report that Ishar games do > not run on NTFS drives > > http://www.ntcompatible.com/u.shtml > Unreal Tournament (Epic) > 4) Game works in XP under FAT32 File System, currently not working > with NTFS system. Hangs after game loads > > http://pub1.ezboard.com/f3dxtremehardware.showMessage?topicID=319.topic&index=18 > It also helps if you run it on an NTFS volume. Yes, some older games > won't work > > http://v4.windowsupdate.microsoft.com/en/default.asp > Q. MY friend noticed I'd upgraded to Windows XP and he told me I > should convert my hard drive's file system to NTFS. He said it's > better than the FAT file system used by Windows 95/98, but he couldn't > tell me why. Can you? Are there any reasons why I shouldn't convert > the drive to NTFS? > > > A. People who make definitive statements like that without any > supporting data are dangerous. > > There are people right now upgrading their computers to Windows XP > just because of the hype of the media or the exultations of some > acquaintance. Some are happy as a result, but some are miserable > because they did not stop to consider the ramifications of such a > dramatic system alteration and didn't do the right research research > before plunging into the choppy XP waters. > > Changing from FAT to NTFS is not as serious as replacing your OS but > it is a major modification and could have a profound effect on how you > use your PC, depending on the type of user you are and how you > interact with your file system. > > In order to decide between NTFS and FAT, take the time to understand > them. FAT stands for File Allocation Table and NTFS stands for NT File > System. File systems are used by your operating system to organize and > deal with files and folders on your computer. > > FAT 16 was originally introduced with MS-DOS back in 1981. An improved > version, FAT 32, was introduced with Windows 95 Service Pack 2. NTFS > was introduced with NT and is common with NT 4 and Windows 2000. > > The FAT file system is far more compatible with other operating > systems like Linux and other flavors of Unix. This allows you to share > files on a system that is a dual boot. NTFS files are not accessible > from other operating systems. > > With a FAT system you can boot up with a floppy if your system crashes > and move files to a disk or copy files into the system from a disk. > This is real handy if you are trying to recover a dead or dying > computer. If Windows crashed you can still access the files. > > With NTFS, if the file system becomes damaged or Windows crashes, it > can be a real pain to recover. > > NTFS offers greater efficiency in terms of disk space utilization and > security. And I hear that system recovery tools in XP have come a long > way, so maybe I am old fashioned. I am a command line kind of guy and > I need the access to my file system that only FAT offers. Others may > be just fine with NTFS. > > Don't change your computer just because someone says you should. > Evaluate your options. Ask yourself two questions: What will I gain? > What will I lose? > > http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/dncode/html/secure06112002.asp > ACL Issues > Imagine a folder exists on an NTFS partition, and that folder has the > following ACL: > > SYSTEM (Full Control) > Administrators (Full Control) > Everyone (Read) > Unless you are a privileged account, such as an administrator or the > system account (many services run as system), the only thing you can > do to in this folder is read files. You cannot write, you cannot > delete, and you cannot do anything else. If your application tries to > perform any file I/O other than read, it will receive an access denied > error. Get used to it-access denied is error #5! > > This is a very common issue. Applications that write data to protected > areas of the file system, or other portions of the operating system, > such as the registry, require the application user be an administrator > to operate correctly. How many games do you know that write high-score > information to the C:\Program Files directory? Let me answer that for > you. Lots. And that's a problem because it means the user playing the > game must be an administrator. It's a problem because many games allow > users to play one another over the Internet, which means they must > open sockets, and if there's a buffer overrun or similar vulnerability > in the game socket-handling code, an attacker could potentially run > code using the vulnerability, and the code would run as an admin. Game > Over! > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------ > > Also, if you use FAT32 and a Dos 7.0 boot disk you can boot to the > boot disk and run your old dos games from a FAT32 volume. On an NTFS > volume and using the boot disk you won't be able to even see the NTFS > volume. As I have been saying, for game compatibility FAT32 makes > sense. Oh, and during my research I came across a number of NTFS pro > sites that said NTFS is faster than FAT32. What a crock of BS, it's > amazing the crap people will say to support their bias. > > P.S. I know the file system used should be transparent to a game or > app, but the fact remains there are situations where it can cause a > problem.

Dameon <[email hidden]> wrote: : http://www.ntcompatible.com/u.shtml : Unreal Tournament (Epic) : 4) Game works in XP under FAT32 File System, currently not working : with NTFS system. Hangs after game loads The NTCompatible lists have results from different users, not tested by the same person ? Haven't tried the other games in the list, but this one I have. Windows XP, it's on NTFS partition and working just fine. Where's the catch?:) TTT

"Dameon" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > On Fri, 04 Oct 2002 15:35:45 GMT, "Biz" <[email hidden]> > wrote: > > >Not one sim, and how about a game from this century? The smallpercentage of people still playing > >those OLD DOS versions could easily get by with a DOS boot disk, which isprobably best even under

Quoted text (8 lines)

> >Win9X. > > You didn't pay attention, if you convert your HD's to NTFS a boot disk > will be no good to you because you won't be able to see the game on > the HD. I've already mentioned there was a problem with GPL on NTFS > with indexing turned off. Use whatever you like, just don't go telling > me what to use because I do my own research and make my own informed > opinions.

The GPL + NTFS problem is bullshit, quite frankly.

> >Not one sim, and how about a game from this century? The small percentage of people still playing probably best even under The GPL + NTFS problem is bullshit, quite frankly.

"Dameon" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > On Fri, 04 Oct 2002 07:03:48 GMT, Jussi 'Igor' Koukku <[email hidden]> > wrote: ><snip>

Quoted text (9 lines)

> > With a FAT system you can boot up with a floppy if your system crashes > and move files to a disk or copy files into the system from a disk. > This is real handy if you are trying to recover a dead or dying > computer. If Windows crashed you can still access the files. > > With NTFS, if the file system becomes damaged or Windows crashes, it > can be a real pain to recover. >

Ever heard of recovery console? http://www.microsoft.com/windows2000/en/server/help/default.asp?url=/windows 2000/en/server/help/recovery_console_overview.htm

Dameon wrote:

Quoted text (9 lines)

> > If you are talking about Win98Lite then you will find there are some > crucial IE files still installed. Now go and try to install Norton > Systemworks 2002. With Win98Lite it can't be done because it won't > install without IE installed. And use another browser won't fix the > problem either. You also can't use MS Money 2002 if you have gutted IE > from your OS either, I'm sure there are others. I've used Win98Lite a > few times and in the end I have always had to dump it because of > problems like the examples above.

Could well be, I don't have anything but the most basic stuff installed on my gaming machine, that means OS (W98Lite), drivers for various cards (no software that comes with them) as well as my wheel/pedals and the games I want to play No firewall, no AV software, no Office, no mail program and no web browser, so while it may be true that there are some IE files still in there, the functionality of IE is gone and I'm free to use whatever web browser I see fit, which makes MS's statement only half true in my opinion > Never siad it was, just giving counter point to the NTFS is best > crowd. It's your PC so do as you like. I use FAT32 actually as I see no need to "complicate" matters, that way if my hd crashes I can hook it up to any computer in the shop and have instant access to all important files, I prefer to hook up crashed HD's to a Win98 pc of possible actually as W98 seems to be more fault tolerant, in some cases a WinXP or Win2k machine will refuse to boot to Windows with a crashed HD connected, I've yet to experience this with a basic W98 installation But what's right for me might not be right for the next person.... Beers and cheers (uncle) Goy http://www.theuspits.com "A man is only as old as the woman he feels........" --Groucho Marx--

Quoted text (8 lines)

> If you are talking about Win98Lite then you will find there are some > crucial IE files still installed. Now go and try to install Norton > Systemworks 2002. With Win98Lite it can't be done because it won't > install without IE installed. And use another browser won't fix the > problem either. You also can't use MS Money 2002 if you have gutted IE > from your OS either, I'm sure there are others. I've used Win98Lite a > few times and in the end I have always had to dump it because of > problems like the examples above.

Could well be, I don't have anything but the most basic stuff installed on my *** machine, that means OS (W98Lite), drivers for various cards (no software that comes with them) as well as my wheel/pedals and the games I want to play No firewall, no AV software, no Office, no mail program and no web browser, so while it may be true that there are some IE files still in there, the functionality of IE is gone and I'm free to use whatever web browser I see fit, which makes MS's statement only half true in my opinion I use FAT32 actually as I see no need to "complicate" matters, that way if my hd crashes I can hook it up to any computer in the shop and have instant access to all important files, I prefer to hook up crashed HD's to a Win98 pc of possible actually as W98 seems to be more fault tolerant, in some cases a WinXP or Win2k machine will refuse to boot to Windows with a crashed HD connected, I've yet to experience this with a basic W98 installation But what's right for me might not be right for the next person.... Beers and cheers (uncle) Goy http://www.theuspits.com "A man is only as old as the woman he feels........" --Groucho Marx--

On Fri, 04 Oct 2002 18:58:53 -0400, Goy Larsen wrote: > Could well be, I don't have anything but the most basic stuff installed > on my gaming machine, that means OS (W98Lite), drivers for various cards > (no software that comes with them) as well as my wheel/pedals and the > games I want to play I only have one machine so need IE installed, but I have Mandrake Linux (posting this while in Madrake 8.2) on the same machine too so it's not like I'm MS's whipping boy or anything.:-) > No firewall, no AV software, no Office, no mail program and no web > browser, so while it may be true that there are some IE files still in > there, the functionality of IE is gone and I'm free to use whatever web > browser I see fit, which makes MS's statement only half true in my > opinion You have always been free to use whatever web browser you choose. SP1 for XP even gives you the option to "hide" IE. It's still installed but it's hidden and you can use Mozilla, Opera, etc. as the default browser. > But what's right for me might not be right for the next person.... And that's really all I've been saying all along, with examples of why someone might prefer FAT32 over NTFS.

Dough Boy wrote: > > I only have one machine so need IE installed, but I have Mandrake Linux > (posting this while in Madrake 8.2) on the same machine too so it's not like I'm MS's whipping boy or anything.:-) If you have another OS working on your system, why would you *need* IE installed in your "gaming OS" ? I can see the convenience of having one as I too often need to quickly find something on the WWW while just as I've gotten comfy in my racing chair and I hate to get up and use my other PC, but I've stuck to it for now, will prolly install Opera at some point though > You have always been free to use whatever web browser you choose. SP1 for > XP even gives you the option to "hide" IE. It's still installed but it's > hidden and you can use Mozilla, Opera, etc. as the default browser. Ah, free to *use* yes, but why should I be forced to install something I don't need ? I hate to have something showed down my throat like that, one of the reasons I'm self employed instead of working for the man, I'm not very good at taking orders that doesn't make sense to me On my work PC at the shop I have IE installed of course, I couldn't live without at it as several of my suppliers seems to use Frontpage to develop their web sites and I do need to visit their support and warranty pages every so often, I keep complaining but unlike Andre Warringa :-) they don't even listen And as on OEM manufacturer I'm even bound by contract with MS not to install any other browser on any new system I deliver with a MS OS, that's part of the OEM license agreement.....how's that Beers and cheers (uncle) Goy http://www.theuspits.com "A man is only as old as the woman he feels........" --Groucho Marx--

On Sun, 06 Oct 2002 08:20:19 -0400, Dameon <[email hidden]> wrote something like this: >unfortunately you sometimes do need it. ie; Windows update. Also, some >games require Windows media player 7.0+ installed too. What really >bugs me about some games is they they require the installation of >Apple's Quicktime on a Windows PC. Obviosuly they developed the game >with Mac's because there is no other reason they couldn't have used a >Windows media player compatible format. Perhaps Quicktime is in some way superior to MP... and developing PC games on a Mac sounds kinda stupid. Besides, Macs are able to produce file formats that are compatible with MP. I'm more amazed that some games require MP 7.0 or higher... MP 6.4 is AFAIK capable of playing all the same formats. >Yea, I need to get self employed for the same reason. I don't take to >any orders from other people very well, especially those mini-hitler >types. You really didn't need to write that down you know. It can be read between the lines quite easily ;) -- - Igor -

On Tue, 08 Oct 2002 12:30:17 -0400, Fortescue Cholmondeley Smythe III <[email hidden]> wrote something like this:

Quoted text (7 lines)

>On Tue, 08 Oct 2002 13:34:54 GMT, Jussi 'Igor' Koukku <[email hidden]> >wrote: > > >>Perhaps Quicktime is in some way superior to MP... > >I doubt it.

Smaller file sizes (both program and media files)? Starts faster? Cheaper licensing for the codec? Could be a number of things. But, this is getting waaaay off topic =) -- - Igor -

Jussi 'Igor' Koukku wrote: > > But, this is getting waaaay off topic =) This is RAS, we're usually off topic by the 6th post...... Beers and cheers (uncle) Goy "The Pits" http://www.theuspits.com/ "A man is only as old as the woman he feels" --Groucho Marx--