Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 29

Thread: Microsoft's exFAT Is Still Crap On Linux

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    14,301

    Default Microsoft's exFAT Is Still Crap On Linux

    Phoronix: Microsoft's exFAT Is Still Crap On Linux

    If you were hoping to see support for Microsoft's exFAT file-system land in the Linux 3.3 kernel, guess again...

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

  2. #2

    Default

    Microsoft's exFAT Is Still Crap On Linux
    You probably meant: It's still crap.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    in front of my box :p
    Posts
    768

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kraftman View Post
    [/h]
    You probably meant: It's still crap.
    Thanks. Exactly what I wanted to say.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    59

    Default

    I'm out of the loop I guess, but what actually uses exFAT? I have yet to run into a USB flash drive formatted with exFAT.

    So when would using exFAT over say ntfs or FAT32 be a good idea?

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    379

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cynyr View Post
    I'm out of the loop I guess, but what actually uses exFAT? I have yet to run into a USB flash drive formatted with exFAT.

    So when would using exFAT over say ntfs or FAT32 be a good idea?
    I think Sony wants to use exFAT for a new generation of 2TB memory cards. Those would be then for Windows and MAC only?

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    California, USA
    Posts
    196

    Default

    FAT32 doesn't handle files larger than 4 GB and NTFS permissions on removable drives can become an issue. exFAT is for modern-day removable drives that don't need (and shouldn't have) permissions that can store 1080p movies which are larger than FAT32's maximum.

    Of course, UDF also fills these requirements, and is well-supported under all NT6-based operating systems. Formatting must be done from the Command Prompt, though. The Xbox 360 now supports UDF as well, so long as the storage device is MBR.
    Last edited by wswartzendruber; 01-08-2012 at 02:55 PM. Reason: Grammar

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    57

    Default

    I would like to see better MTP support first before even worrying about exFat.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    845

    Default

    I just have to wonder if Micheal is retarded or simpy trying to create a negative image of Linux / Open Source, this 'article' is a goddamn joke. Claiming that Linux 'still doesn't have 'proper' extFAT support'. Proper? As in in-kernel support? He knows full and well that the reason Linux doesn't have in-kernel support for exFAT or NTFS is that they are patented proprietary Microsoft filesystems and that including them would open up a new possible attack vector for Microsoft (you know, that company which is running around threatening to sue Linux using companies over patents unless they pay up). And yet while fully knowing this he uses it to attack Linux.

    Meanwhile, just like with NTFS, exFAT is fully supported on Linux through fuse which is a file-system implementation OUTSIDE of the kernel, where it belongs given it's patented and proprietary nature.

    But that doesn't stop Micheal from going with the bullshit headline of 'Microsoft's exFAT still crap on Linux'.

    I mean wtf? I used to say that if Phoronix actually got their game together and fixed their appallingly bad compiler benchmark suite then I would happily pay for a subscription, not anymore. I'll keep clicking the ads from time to time to make up for the bandwidth I use here but no way will I buy a subscription on a site which is consistently puring out pure bullshit intended to make Linux and open source in general look bad. I don't know what Micheal's endgame is but it sure as hell isn't the promotion of Linux.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cynyr View Post
    I'm out of the loop I guess, but what actually uses exFAT? I have yet to run into a USB flash drive formatted with exFAT.

    So when would using exFAT over say ntfs or FAT32 be a good idea?
    It's the specified file system for SDXC memory cards (SDHC successor).

    from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SDXC#SDXC
    SDXC cards are to be pre-formatted with Microsoft's proprietary and patented exFAT file system, which the host device might not support. Since Microsoft does not publish the specifications of exFAT and its use requires a non-free license, many alternative or older operating systems do not support exFAT for technical or legal reasons. The use of exFAT on some SDXC cards may render SDXC unsuitable as a universal exchange medium, as an SDXC card that uses exFAT would not be usable in all host devices. Since the FAT32 file system supports volumes up to the SDXC's maximum theoretical capacity of 2 TB as well, a user could reformat an SDXC card to use FAT32 for greater portability between computers (see below), but consumer products such as digital cameras and camcorders do not normally provide the choice to format SDXC cards as FAT32 nor do they accept FAT32-reformatted SDXC cards.
    I wonder how they (the standard comity) thought it would be a beneficial to the consumer industry to introduce requirements on software that can't be implemented without a licence from someone into a memory card standard. It's not like they wouldn't know how much linux is used in the embedded consumer electronics space.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    238

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cynyr View Post
    I'm out of the loop I guess, but what actually uses exFAT? I have yet to run into a USB flash drive formatted with exFAT.

    So when would using exFAT over say ntfs or FAT32 be a good idea?
    AFAIK it's the default filesystem for SDXC memory cards.

Posting Permissions

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