Michael, why no FAT or NTFS benchmarks? Really the only filesystems on a traditional USB should be
FAT (or exFat if its over 4GB), and thats for interoperability
NTFS if its an external HDD via USB. Again for interoperability.
Or if you only use Linux...F2FS. (Ext4 if you dont trust F2FS yet.)
So we're kind of missing 2 out of the 4 filesystems for this >.>
I can't answer for Michael, but I am guessing, it's because main reason of tests is not to show you which one is best, but rather to point at new one, that is specifically designed for Linux in mind with Samsung to support it.
If Samsung are about to do this for their cameras and stuff - god knows how far standart may go. Since it's open source - it can be ported to Windows. Ext3 already is!(you need to install special driver for that, but you can mount ext3 and prolly ext4 too)
Lets just hope that Samsung goes "all in" on F2FS and releases drivers for Windows and MacOSX to ultimately replace FAT-based file systems in their devices (cameras, tablets, phones, TVs ...). If one major player starts breaking the unhealthy reliance of FAT, the world will be a better place.
Problem is usb mass storage only give direct access to data does not deal with file systems, means lot ofalready existing embedded devices will not able to read it. Its possible to switch but transition will take long.