Fat32

-Why did my new laptop come formated FAT32 instead of NTFS?

-When I install my new hard drive, will the recovery disk allow me to install to one partition with NTFS?

 

START>RUN>CMD

type in: convert x: /fs:ntfs


This will convert you new drive or the one you have now to NTFS. My aspire came the same way. Change X with your drive.[B)]

 

Thanks Davila but I've already done that. I think converting slows things down...as opposed to a fresh install using the correct file system.

I wrote Acer support and asked the same questions. Here is the email they sent back:

<blockquote id='quote'> quote:<hr height='1' noshade id='quote'>This forum provides technical support only. We do not have information
regarding decisions behind a particular products configurations such as
NTFS versus FAT32. There is nobody that can be contacted to provide this
information. I'm sorry I am unable to assist further with this issue.
Please note that the recovery cd's are designed to work with the original
components. It is likely the the cd's will not work with a larger drive.
<hr height='1' noshade id='quote'></font id='quote'></blockquote id='quote'>

 

<blockquote id='quote'> quote:<hr height='1' noshade id='quote'>Originally posted by Excavator

 

I have personally noticed a performance drop when having my drives formatted with NTFS vs Fat32. I think it comes down to the sector sizes in NTFS. Usually it's 512bytes/sector, while Fat32 is approx 32k per sector. You save space with a smaller sector size, but slows down the system (from my personal experience). That's why I only use Fat32 on all my drives.

-Vb-

 

Hi Venom,
It may have been some other issue that caused your performance drop. I was just searching the net on the subject because I had thought it was just the opposite and NTFS was a faster file system. After reading many sites I think NTFS is probably somewhat faster although I did'nt notice any speed increase or decrease when going to NTFS from FAT32. They seemed about the same to me. I changed to NTFS more for the following reasons.

Has better security -- such as file-wise encryption (not supported by WinXP home) and per-user access rules.
Supports user quotas.
Has file-wise compression.
Is journaled, decreasing data loss.
Supports larger files than FAT (greater than 4GB).
Allows larger volume sizes (greater than 1TB).
Is more space-efficient on larger size volumes (greater than 8GB).
More resistant to fragmentation.

On the other hand, there are good reasons for FAT32 as well.
If you need to swap drives from XP machines to win98 systems.

Jack


"They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security" (Ben Franklin)
http://pbase.com/joneill

 

http://www.pcsforeveryone.com/itemdesc2.cfm?type=p&itmID=121654&ItmSubCatID=145

" Note: NTFS is faster than FAT-32."

This is from a respected local custom pc shop in my area.
I bought my desktop from them and its great!

 

<blockquote id='quote'> quote:<hr height='1' noshade id='quote'>Originally posted by Davila
START>RUN>CMD

type in: convert x: /fs:ntfs


This will convert you new drive or the one you have now to NTFS. My aspire came the same way. Change X with your drive.
<hr height='1' noshade id='quote'></font id='quote'></blockquote id='quote'>

Does this procedure cause any data loss?

 

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/using/setup/expert/convertfat.mspx
is the MS article on conversion.
I've done it successfully to several machines with no data loss.

 

<blockquote id='quote'> quote:<hr height='1' noshade id='quote'>Originally posted by bootleg2go

 

<blockquote id='quote'> quote:<hr height='1' noshade id='quote'>
If you convert a FAT32 to NTFS then it most probably will lead to performance loss!
<hr height='1' noshade id='quote'></font id='quote'></blockquote id='quote'>

OH CRAP!!!
I will read the article.

I had the same "problem" with my new Acer 3201xci. Formatted as FAT32.
I did the conversion on it.
The weird thing is I bought a new faster drive and formatted it as
NTFS before putting it in the PC. After putting it in the PC it was
converted by the system to FAT32. Another freaking weird Acer XP Pro
thing among several that is driving me bonkers and Im about ready
to wipe out the whole thing and install Win2K over it and be done with it!!!! I see no advantage of XP Pro over Win2K but of course Im
no expert!!

 

Ok so I used a 3rd party tool to repartition (get rid of the pesky D drive) and reformat the drive with NTFS. Then I used the recovery
disk and it reformatted the drive back to FAT32.
How annoying!
I wonder if leaving the drive as it is outweighs converting to
NTFS and having some sort of performance loss. Does anyone know
what the benchmarks are for this loss? Maybe it's miniscule?

<blockquote id='quote'> quote:<hr height='1' noshade id='quote'>Originally posted by ashugarg
NTFS is a faster system (and more secure) - but only when it is disk was originally formatted NTFS and then the OS and other programs installed on it.

If you convert a FAT32 to NTFS then it most probably will lead to performance loss!

The exact reason is explained here:
http://aumha.org/win5/a/ntfscvt.php
<hr height='1' noshade id='quote'></font id='quote'></blockquote id='quote'>

There's also a good explanation here:
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;307881

"Some earlier programs that were not written for Microsoft Windows NT 4.0 or for Microsoft Windows 2000 may exhibit slow performance after you convert the FAT32 file system to NTFS. This issue does not occur on a clean partition of NTFS. "

This implies that the performance loss applies only in this situation.
For everyday business use that would not be an issue considering
I use all modern and updated applications. However for earlier
appplications like games such as Quake2 that might be an issue
and I still like to play that one!

Ok I did some more reading in this and found the following:
http://www.boredguru.com/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=16&forum=24

A guy says:
<blockquote id='quote'>quote:<hr height='1' noshade id='quote'>
Bear in mind that Windows cannot format a FAT32 partition that is any larger than 32GB. This is the case because FAT32 is terribly inefficient on volumes that are larger than 32GB: fragmentation becomes a serious problem.
<hr height='1' noshade id='quote'></font id='quote'></blockquote id='quote'>

This now explains why Acer partitioned a 60gig drive
into two 29gig drives. I removed the second partition
so if this is correct then I will have to convert to NTFS.
I'm going to write the president of Acer a letter and
ask him nicely why the installation of the OS on their
notebook is so boneheaded!

Ok more reading actually that quote is only partially correct.
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;Q314463&ID=kb;en-us;Q314463

<blockquote id='quote'>quote:<hr height='1' noshade id='quote'>
You cannot format a volume larger than 32 gigabytes (GB) in size using the FAT32 file system during the Windows XP installation process. Windows XP can mount and support FAT32 volumes larger than 32 GB (subject to the other limits), but you cannot create a FAT32 volume larger than 32 GB by using the Format tool during Setup. If you need to format a volume that is larger than 32 GB, use the NTFS file system to format it.
<hr height='1' noshade id='quote'></font id='quote'></blockquote id='quote'>

See also:
http://kadaitcha.cx/ntfs.html

Aha well here is the most clear statement I have read thus far:
<blockquote id='quote'>quote:<hr height='1' noshade id='quote'>
Performance: On volumes that are created (not converted) as NTFS volumes, clusters start at sector zero, therefore every cluster is aligned on what is known as the cluster boundary. If the FAT32 partition was not created by Windows XP or Windows 2000, the FAT/FAT32 reserved structures mean that a FAT/FAT32 format cannot guarantee that data clusters will be aligned on a cluster boundary. In turn, this can cause the conversion process to be forced to use 512k clusters, thus causing a potentially serious degradation in disk performance.
<hr height='1' noshade id='quote'></font id='quote'></blockquote id='quote'>

I think since I can't change the way the recovery disk works
I may have to reformat the drive and install my copy of Win2k.

 

Ok I did it!
I followed the instructions on aumha.org and so far so good!
I downloaded boot it and made a boot floppy which I then
used Nero to create a boot CD since this notebook has no floppy.
Then I used its utility to align the sectors. This didnt take
any time so as aumha said it was already good.
I then defragmented the hard drive even though it said it was fine.
I then did the conversion and used the Bootit tool again to verify
the cluster size and it is 4k!
So now I can finally do something useful with the notebook!