|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Yes, NTFS is much more robust and in most cases is self-healing since NT
maintains the requisite info to repair corrupted directories and files. I would
not want my OS drive to be subject to vagaries of FAT. I've run 100% NTFS for
years now although I do keep a DOS 6.x boot disk around with fdisk and format on
it. Used it once when 200meg proved insufficient for upgrading from 3.5 to 4.0
and I had to repartition and reformat the C drive using DOS, then after
restroring NT from tape I told it to convert FAT to NTFS.
BTW, one essential trick for fast recovery is to allocate 100meg for a spare NT
OS drive and install a minimum NT configuration. Then, should you have to
restore the OS from tape, you can boot to the alternate copy of NT and restore
100% without worrying about conflicts with open and locked OS files.
Earl
-----Original Message-----
From: John Hayden <sente@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: omega-list@xxxxxxxxxx <omega-list@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thursday, May 14, 1998 3:57 PM
Subject: Re: Windows NT
>The NT file structure is a lot more efficient. My last comment is that
>Microsoft told me that you want to make sure that you have your C: drive
>set up with the FAT file structure in case the HD crashed, and/or NT
>developed a fatal error.
|