Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 23

Thread: Linux Support For Microsoft's exFAT File-System

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    15,138

    Default Linux Support For Microsoft's exFAT File-System

    Phoronix: Linux Support For Microsoft's exFAT File-System

    Introduced in Windows Vista Service Pack 1 and then last week as a Windows XP update was exFAT. exFAT, or the Extended File Allocation Table, is Microsoft's new file-system for use on mobile devices like large USB flash drives...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=NzAzMg

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Portugal
    Posts
    536

    Default

    exFAT is a real example of "business as usual" in redmond.

    A new filesystem to be used in flash drives and memory cards, done entirely without considering other systems -- what about trying to arrive at a middle term, decent filesystem that can support features from windows, unix and others, like for example support for saving unix permissions; microsoft says: HA HA! -- undocumented, so that others will stay in the dark, and seems that will be unsupported on most old microsoft OS's, so better not take that pendrive to granny...

    Of course the minute microsoft makes crap like this, manufacturers and people start using it, and other systems are left out. Microsoft gets the power to push crap like this on the world via their windows monopoly!

    Oh and some years from now microsoft might get a slap on the wrist from us or eu authorities, after the "transition" is complete...

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Linuxland
    Posts
    5,187

    Default

    Nothing new in that. For years now all factory-formatted usb drives have had messed up partition tables, that often will not mount under older kernels. Because M$ Windows "does not support usb partitions", yet when one manually creates a proper partition table the first partition is mounted just fine in windows.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    233

    Default

    The same as usual, the companies should stay with Fat32 and not accept this crap of FS.

    Also, exFat didn't have advantages compared to NFTS or Fat32.
    http://www.testfreaks.com/blog/infor...ntfs-vs-exfat/

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    331

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KDesk View Post
    The same as usual, the companies should stay with Fat32 and not accept this crap of FS.
    They should be using UDF, in my opinion. Every current OS supports it already.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    575

    Default

    the more Linux gets into the market, the more Microsoft does this type of shit. We're gonna see worse things from them in the near future.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Third Rock from the Sun
    Posts
    6,584

    Default

    Booo Hooo, I don't see other file systems bending over backwards to accommodate other OS's as well. So MS makes another FS, so what. I don't see the opensource community making their file systems easily accessible on windows, os x, insert alternative OS name here. If you run 64-bit windows the only option you have is a slow ext driver, Perhaps if the foss community would put some effort into making their FS easily accessible in windows you wouldn't have to worry about stuff like this. I only can dream so far of being to easily r/w to filesystems like btrfs, xfs, etc in windows.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    575

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by deanjo View Post
    Booo Hooo, I don't see other file systems bending over backwards to accommodate other OS's as well. So MS makes another FS, so what. I don't see the opensource community making their file systems easily accessible on windows, os x, insert alternative OS name here. If you run 64-bit windows the only option you have is a slow ext driver, Perhaps if the foss community would put some effort into making their FS easily accessible in windows you wouldn't have to worry about stuff like this. I only can dream so far of being to easily r/w to filesystems like btrfs, xfs, etc in windows.

    That's a good point.
    Also, Microsoft has all the rights to create a file system. However, there are no good reasons to make it proprietary. Actually, the only reason is to lock users to Windows. In a way or in another, at least 70% of linux users also have Windows installed and even MacOS people start to have windows on their machines. In other words, Windows is everywhere and this is what M$ wants. And they have the power to do it.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    15

    Default

    Granted, if you don't have to deal with exFAT formatted media, you can use another file-system like EXT4, Tux3, or Btrfs for your high-capacity removable media.
    Way to go, Michael, recommending two unstable and still-experimental file systems for storing data

    I don't see other file systems bending over backwards to accommodate other OS's as well.
    Well, all the Linux filesystems are out in the open, so is ZFS. While not all of these filesystems may make an effort to be interoperable, they don't actively hinder it.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Third Rock from the Sun
    Posts
    6,584

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by piquadrat View Post
    Well, all the Linux filesystems are out in the open, so is ZFS. While not all of these filesystems may make an effort to be interoperable, they don't actively hinder it.

    Hindered or not, if the FS does not have a port to other OS's it's just as useless outside of it's native OS.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •