[ILUG] NTFS is better than ext3?

[Rick Moen]

Quoting Satelle, StevenX (stevenx.satelle at intel.com):

> This was used hourly by over 300/400 people, it was the old ntfs ver 4
> used by NT (service pack 3 I think) Since the switch 2 w2k and ntfs v5
> It hasn't happened again.

Microsoft's versioning for NTFS filesystem formats is kind of confused,
partly because they suddenly announced as of Win2k that what had always
been called 3.0 would henchforth be pumped up to 5.0 (but both names
persist) -- and partly because people get driver and format versions
confused.  Here are my notes from
http://linuxmafia.com/~rick/linux-info/ntfs on that, after the head of
the Linux-NTFS project whacked me over the knuckles about inaccuracy.
(He's been on a jihad to stamp out such inaccuracies, his team having
painstakingly reverse-engineered _all three_ NTFS versions to improve
Linux's support for them.)


NTFS version                        NT version
----------                          ----------            
1.2                                 3.1 through 4.0 w/SP3  
3.0 (which Microsoft calls "5.0")   2000, 4.0 w/SP4 
3.1 (which Microsoft calls "5.1")   XP, 2000 w/SP4  

"fsutil fsinfo ntfsinfo <volume>:" at the NT command line will report
what the NTFS _driver_ version is, but there have been only three NTFS 
_format_ versions.  Obviously, the now-vanished very-early versions of
NT didn't call their NTFS format "1.2", but it was reportedly unchanged
until Windows 2000 and NT 4.0's SP4.

-- 
Cheers,                        Open-source SourceForge retakes the lead:
Rick Moen                      http://gforge.org/  Thank you, Tim Perdue.
rick at linuxmafia.com