Greetings --

Did you mean "not more stable and more secure" or "lot more stable
and more secure?" :-} I'll presume you meant the latter, as that's
the correct statement.


Bruce Chambers

--
Help us help you:
http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

You can have peace. Or you can have freedom. Don't ever count on
having both at once. -- RAH


"cimex" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]..

> NTFS is bot more stable and more secure.
>
>
>

On Fri, 17 Oct 2003 10:00:52 -0600, Bruce Chambers wrote:

> Greetings --
>
> Did you mean "not more stable and more secure" or "lot more stable
> and more secure?" :-} I'll presume you meant the latter, as that's
> the correct statement.
>
>
> Bruce Chambers

I thought he meant "both more stable and secure" but I could be wrong

--
Sharon F
MS MVP - Windows Shell/User

Greetings --

Good point. That does make more sense, doesn't it? Thanks for
pointing out.

Bruce Chambers

--
Help us help you:
http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

You can have peace. Or you can have freedom. Don't ever count on
having both at once. -- RAH


"Sharon F" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]..

> On Fri, 17 Oct 2003 10:00:52 -0600, Bruce Chambers wrote:
>
>
> I thought he meant "both more stable and secure" but I could be

wrong

>
> --
> Sharon F
> MS MVP - Windows Shell/User

Please. 8-)
Wes
"Mike Brannigan [MSFT]" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]..

> Michel - your PC clock appear to be set to the year 2026.
> Since we do not wish to have everyone see your post for the next 23 years,
> would you mind if I removed it?
>
> --
> Regards,
>
> Mike
> --
> Mike Brannigan [Microsoft]
>
> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
> rights
>
> Please note I cannot respond to e-mailed questions, please use these
> newsgroups
>
> "Michel Savard" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:QEFib.3689$[email protected]. .

> > I have just purchased a new system with a 120Gigs harddrive and I tried to
> > format it with a Win98 boot disk with Fdisk and format but for soem reason
> > it can only fdisk to 60 gigs?
> > Is this because of FAT32 restrictions?
> > Would I be better to format NTFS?
> > Wouldn't it be easier to maintain with FAT32 format?
> >
> > Thank you for your help in this mattter.
> >
> >
> >

>
>

Hi, Michel.

Throw away that MS-DOS boot disk! Or at least hide it so that you won't be
tempted to use it again.

As several others have told you, initial partitioning and formatting can be
done by Setup after booting from the WinXP CD-ROM. After WinXP is
installed, use Disk Management (type diskmgmt.msc from the Run prompt) to
create and delete other partitions, assign or reassign drive letters, and
format them to your choice of FAT or NTFS. As they said, MS restricts the
ability of WinXP to format FAT32 to volumes no larger than 32 GB. If you
insist on larger FAT32 volumes, you will have to find that boot floppy I
told you to hide. According to MS, "The maximum volume size that Windows 98
can create is 127.53 GB."
http://www.microsoft.com/windows2000...asp?frame=true

Note that these limits are per VOLUME (primary partition or logical drive in
an extended partition). Since a physical drive can hold several volumes,
the limits per HD are several times the per-volume limits.

FAT or NTFS? Unless you plan to install Win9x/ME on this computer, there's
no reason to use FAT on it. NTFS is much more secure, both in the sense of
secure from unauthorized access and in the sense of secure from hard drive
glitches.

See this TechNet page for more details:
Size Limitations in NTFS and FAT File Systems
http://www.microsoft.com/TechNet/pro...asp?frame=true

I've been using a 120 GB secondary drive for several months. The largest
volume on it is 60 GB, but that's my choice, not due to any restriction.
Disk Management would have cheerfully created a single partition for the
whole 120 GB if I had asked, and formatted it NTFS.

RC
--
R. C. White, CPA
San Marcos, TX
[email protected]
Microsoft Windows MVP

"Michel Savard" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:kPXib.5689$[email protected]. .

>
> Thank you all for your prompt reply.
> I have changed my clock to show 2003 now. Not sure how it got to change?
>
>
> "Michel Savard" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:QEFib.3689$[email protected]. .

> > I have just purchased a new system with a 120Gigs harddrive and I tried

to

> > format it with a Win98 boot disk with Fdisk and format but for soem

reason

> > it can only fdisk to 60 gigs?
> > Is this because of FAT32 restrictions?
> > Would I be better to format NTFS?
> > Wouldn't it be easier to maintain with FAT32 format?
> >
> > Thank you for your help in this mattter.

I have just purchased a new system with a 120Gigs harddrive and I tried to
format it with a Win98 boot disk with Fdisk and format but for soem reason
it can only fdisk to 60 gigs?
Is this because of FAT32 restrictions?
Would I be better to format NTFS?
Wouldn't it be easier to maintain with FAT32 format?

Thank you for your help in this mattter.