Ntfs Or Fat32?

[MG]

Sadly enough, it's been a while since I've used Linux (due to school and interning jobs that pretty much forced me to use Windows). Neither have I been using Linux much at home, mostly for the same reasons: the most important one being homework. So, in the meanwhile, I lost track and don't know how things have improved as far as - for example - NTFS and Linux goes.

I currently have a 200 GB harddisc, which I originally formatted as FAT32 so I could also use it and under with Linux (which I did). I've recently bought an extra, 250 GB, external USB harddisc. It was formatted NTFS by default, and there's nothing on it (yet). I'm not sure wheter NTFS support has improved. So, my question is:

What would you recommend me? NTFS or FAT32? What is better in terms of speed, reliability and Linux support?

Thanks in advance.

[peliosis]

sesi forum thread

I have a similar problem.

It depends on what are you going to do.

NTFS is not well supported under linux and you are likely to have some trouble with it. It also tends to fragment, operates better on smaller files, and has many 3D unnecessary features.

FAT is straight and easy, I read that it's faster for video processing, but don't heard anyone really uses it:)

It have some huge limitations though (file size, partition size)

If you doesn't need a lot of space under linux make one or two fat partitions and leave the rest for NTFS but I personally have my 160 GB divided into five FAT partitions.

Many small partitions are a bit disturbing but are faster and easier to defrag.

cheers

Peter

[MG]

Thanks for the information and advice peliosis! (Also for your reply at the SESI forum).