On 4/27/2010 1:22 AM, (E-Mail Removed) wrote:
snip
> old one, for what I would have paid for XP.
>
> But there is one problem. He installed it using the NTFS format. I
> DO NOT want NTFS. (Two reasons, 1. I still use some dos software, 2.
> NTFS scares me, because if Windows fails on Fat32, I can still access
> the data from Dos, but I know far too many people who lost all their
> data when a NTFS partition failed. I know that XP will run almost as
> well on a Fat32 partition (just like my Win2000 works fine on Fat32).
>
> IF I CHANGE THE FORMAT FROM NTFS TO FAT32, WILL XP STILL RUN?
> (I do not want to reinstall).
>
> I have "Partition Magic", which will not only change the partition
> without losing all the data, but can even make partitions on one
> drive.

snip

I believe all your questions have more or less been answered; what
remains is, what is the probability Partition Magic will do what you
want? Until you try, it is impossible to tell for sure.

As Lem said, since your system is basically a newly installed one, this
may work. May be try this surgery with a more recent program would be a
better bet. EASEUS Partition Master or Acronis Disk Director might be
safer, especially if you are dealing with a large partition, say, over 80G.

I am surprised nobody came to discuss the reasons you want to go back to
Fat32. People usually get very excited on this topic. Personally, I have
been sticking to FAT 32 and this is one of the many reasons I have kept
using XP. I did once try NFTS and the first thing I noticed was the
performance impact. Then, when my system crashed, I discovered how
difficult it is to repair a NTFS partition if you are not an IT
professional. I had to reinstall. Since I never found myself with a
crashed FAT 32 partition I could not repair, the decision was quickly
made to go back to FAT 32.

Until I need an application that runs only on W7 and NTFS, I will stay
with XP. This time is probably decades away!

Good luck.
--
John Doue

(E-Mail Removed) wrote:
>
> It's good to know that some of the linux Cds can access NTFS, but I
> still run several pure DOS apps that will not run in NTFS.
>

Name one program. Just one.

Unless the DOS program is fiddling with the disk at the hardware level - not
the API level, at specific track and sector level - the DOS program cannot
tell it's working with an NTFS partition.

It's the same concept as data coming over a network: the receiving computer
has no knowledge of the operating system that generated the data packet.

Many commercial programs say, on their box, that they require Win98, WinXP,
etc. I have NEVER seen a commercial program that required a particular file
system.

And, within all human reason, neither has anybody else.

HeyBub wrote:
> (E-Mail Removed) wrote:
>> It's good to know that some of the linux Cds can access NTFS, but I
>> still run several pure DOS apps that will not run in NTFS.
>>
>
> Name one program. Just one.
>
> Unless the DOS program is fiddling with the disk at the hardware level - not
> the API level, at specific track and sector level - the DOS program cannot
> tell it's working with an NTFS partition.

And NT operating systems do not permit direct access to hardware so if
the DOS application needs direct disk access it still wouldn't work even
if it were on FAT or FAT32 drives. As you said, the file system is
completely irrelevant, either the application runs on XP or it doesn't,
installing XP on FAT32 won't make the DOS application work any more than
it would on NTFS.

John

"HeyBub" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> (E-Mail Removed) wrote:
>>
>> It's good to know that some of the linux Cds can access NTFS, but I
>> still run several pure DOS apps that will not run in NTFS.
>>
>
> Name one program. Just one.

OK, I think this is one: MSDOS. If you boot from a DOS CD or thumb drive or
floppy, none of the NTFS drives show up. So most DOS programs run under
that DOS bootup will not see those NTFS drives either. There are, of
course, some exceptions, likeNorton's GDisk.

-Paul Randall

>
> Unless the DOS program is fiddling with the disk at the hardware level -
> not the API level, at specific track and sector level - the DOS program
> cannot tell it's working with an NTFS partition.
>
> It's the same concept as data coming over a network: the receiving
> computer has no knowledge of the operating system that generated the data
> packet.
>
> Many commercial programs say, on their box, that they require Win98,
> WinXP, etc. I have NEVER seen a commercial program that required a
> particular file system.
>
> And, within all human reason, neither has anybody else.
>

(E-Mail Removed) wrote:

> My first encounter with XP (aside from just playing around with it),
> was when a friend's computer crashed. I had always helped him when
> his Win98 computer failed, and now his one year old brand new computer
> was completely crashed. He had lots of important photos, and months
> of work with some geneology stuff he was doing.

If he didn't bother making a backup his photos and time couldn't have
been all that important to him.


> I spent a full 10 or 11 hours one day trying to get that thing to run.
> I used the repair cd, I tried to reinstall XP on top of the failed
> boot. I booted from Dos floppies, I even installed Win98 on another
> drive, and tried to connect the XP drive as a slave. No matter what I
> did, it was hopeless. He ended up losing everything.

Would you try to mount (slave) a FAT32 drive on a DOS 6.0 or a Windows
95A operating system? No? Why not? What made you think that Windows
98 could read NTFS?


> It was that moment when I said that I'd never use XP. I have been
> running Win98 since 1998, and no matter how badly 98 has gotten messed
> up, I was always able to retrieve the data, just losing some of the OS
> files, which can be easily replaced. I swore I'd never install XP and
> quite honestly I hated it, after seeing what happened to that friends
> computer.
>
> It was several years later that I learned it was not XP, but that damn
> NTFS format that caused the loss of data.

So, how did you come to the conclusion that NTFS caused the data loss?
What tangible evidence to that have you got? If you were to mount an
ext2/3 or Reiser disk in a Windows XP machine would you declare all the
files on the disk lost because XP couldn't read it? And would you blame
the Linux file system for the 'apparent' loss of files?


> That was about the same
> time I installed Windows 2000 on an old laptop that I had gotten,
> which came with Win98, but in order to use the addon WIFI card, it
> required Win2000 or XP. As soon as I installed Win2000, I quickly
> found that I could not use Dos. That's when I learned that I could
> install Win2000 on a Fat32 partition. I reinstalled it after
> formatting to Fat32, and it's worked better and ran well ever since.
> Eventually the harddrive was failing, and I was still able to retrieve
> the data before the drive totally fried.

So you still hadn't learned your lesson... along the same line you might
one day find out that its too late to buy house insurance when your
house is on fire...


> Well, I finally decided to upgrade to XP, only because I was able to
> buy a much newer and faster, used computer for less than it would cost
> to buy a copy of XP. I am quite pleased with the increased power and
> other new features. However I did not even bother to ask the seller
> about the drive format at the time. The seller lives several hundred
> miles away, because I bought the computer while I was on a trip and
> saw an ad for it, at a price I could not refuse.
>
> So, when I got home, I found out that it was a NTFS format and I got a
> lump in my throat. I dont mind learning the new OS, and I still have
> my older computer to use, but I simply do not want the NTFS format.
> But without the "original" Cd, I am a little unsure about whether I
> can get it to run if I needed to reinstall, and he also installed
> other software that I do not have the original programs.
>
> I have changed partition sizes and added partitions and more, on my
> Win98 and Win2000 computers without any problems, using Partition
> Magic. So, I would hope that it would work the same way in XP. My
> other thought was to keep just XP in a very small partition (Drive C)
> and use partition magic to create a Drive D partition, where I'd keep
> all my data on D. That way only the OS would be in a NTFS partition,
> and D: would be Fat32. But in the end, I still would rather change
> everything to Fat32.
>
> It's good to know that some of the linux Cds can access NTFS, but I
> still run several pure DOS apps that will not run in NTFS.

Unless you are dual booting to DOS the file system is completely
irrelevant to the DOS application, either it works on XP or it doesn't.

With all due respect, your post simply points to two immutable computing
facts:

1- It doesn't matter which operating system or which file system you
use, sooner or later anyone without a proper backup will lose files.
Happens to Mac users, happens to Linux users, happens to Sun/Unix users
and, oh God, does it too ever happen to Windows 98 users!

2- People who don't understand how "it" works or how to fix "it" blame
the computer, or the operating system, or the file system, or their
kids, or their kid sister, or their aging parents or....

John

Paul Randall wrote:
> "HeyBub" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>> (E-Mail Removed) wrote:
>>> It's good to know that some of the linux Cds can access NTFS, but I
>>> still run several pure DOS apps that will not run in NTFS.
>>>
>> Name one program. Just one.
>
> OK, I think this is one: MSDOS.

That's not a program, it's an operating system!

> If you boot from a DOS CD or thumb drive or
> floppy, none of the NTFS drives show up.

Well gee, how surprising! It's no secret that DOS can't read NTFS... no
more than it is that DOS versions prior to 6.2 can't read FAT32!

John

<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> On Tue, 27 Apr 2010 10:37:47 +0300, John Doue <(E-Mail Removed)>
> wrote:
>
> Mister Friendly

It seems you have a tendency to draw conclusions based on an extremely small
sample size (to be precise: a sample of one). When your friend had a problem
with his computer, you concluded that the fault was with Windows XP. One
sample, one firm conclusion. Later on you found you were wrong (surprise,
surprise), so you concluded that the problem was with NTFS. Your method of
reasoning is equivalent to saying that Ford motor cars are unsafe after your
neighbour slammed his Ford into a tree while at the same time ignoring that
he was drunk, was using his mobile phone while driving and was giving a
cyclist the two-finger salute through the open Window.

philo wrote:
> (E-Mail Removed) wrote:
>> On Tue, 27 Apr 2010 10:37:47 +0300, John Doue <(E-Mail Removed)>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 4/27/2010 1:22 AM, (E-Mail Removed) wrote:
>>> snip
>>>> old one, for what I would have paid for XP.
>>>>
>>>> But there is one problem. He installed it using the NTFS format. I
>>>> DO NOT want NTFS. (Two reasons, 1. I still use some dos software, 2.
>>>> NTFS scares me, because if Windows fails on Fat32, I can still access
>>>> the data from Dos, but I know far too many people who lost all their
>>>> data when a NTFS partition failed. I know that XP will run almost as
>>>> well on a Fat32 partition (just like my Win2000 works fine on Fat32).
>>>>
>>>> IF I CHANGE THE FORMAT FROM NTFS TO FAT32, WILL XP STILL RUN?
>>>> (I do not want to reinstall).
>>>>
>>>> I have "Partition Magic", which will not only change the partition
>>>> without losing all the data, but can even make partitions on one
>>>> drive.
>>> snip
>>>
>>> I believe all your questions have more or less been answered; what
>>> remains is, what is the probability Partition Magic will do what you
>>> want? Until you try, it is impossible to tell for sure.
>>>
>>> As Lem said, since your system is basically a newly installed one, this
>>> may work. May be try this surgery with a more recent program would be a
>>> better bet. EASEUS Partition Master or Acronis Disk Director might be
>>> safer, especially if you are dealing with a large partition, say, over
>>> 80G.
>>>
>>> I am surprised nobody came to discuss the reasons you want to go back to
>>> Fat32. People usually get very excited on this topic. Personally, I have
>>> been sticking to FAT 32 and this is one of the many reasons I have kept
>>> using XP. I did once try NFTS and the first thing I noticed was the
>>> performance impact. Then, when my system crashed, I discovered how
>>> difficult it is to repair a NTFS partition if you are not an IT
>>> professional. I had to reinstall. Since I never found myself with a
>>> crashed FAT 32 partition I could not repair, the decision was quickly
>>> made to go back to FAT 32.
>>>
>>> Until I need an application that runs only on W7 and NTFS, I will stay
>>> with XP. This time is probably decades away!
>>>
>>> Good luck.
>>
>> My first encounter with XP (aside from just playing around with it),
>> was when a friend's computer crashed. I had always helped him when
>> his Win98 computer failed, and now his one year old brand new computer
>> was completely crashed. He had lots of important photos, and months
>> of work with some geneology stuff he was doing.
>>
>> I spent a full 10 or 11 hours one day trying to get that thing to run.
>> I used the repair cd, I tried to reinstall XP on top of the failed
>> boot. I booted from Dos floppies, I even installed Win98 on another
>> drive, and tried to connect the XP drive as a slave. No matter what I
>> did, it was hopeless. He ended up losing everything.
> Big mistake
>
> No way could you have accessed an NTFS partition from win98 or dos

There are *some* utilties that will allow access to NTFS partitions from DOS
or Win98, at least as I recall. NTFS4DOS, NTFSDOS, and perhaps Bart PE(?),
or something along those lines, if my memory serves me.

> All you would have to have done was install XP on another drive
> then slave the old drive to it...and all the data would have been there
> Hope you kept the drive > The reason the data was lost was simply
> because you did not understand NTFS.
>
> No need to be paranoid...
> I'd leave your machine as NTFS and you can always recover the data from
> your win2k machine or from a live Linux cd
>
> That said: if you insist...you can convert NTFS to Fat32 by using
> Partition Magic. In theory it will work...but there is always
> the possibility of failure...especially with the boot sector...
> so I'd not risk it.

Same here. :-)
And one can always create a bootable DOS flash disk for some dedicated DOS
applications, provided the PC isn't too old.

"Bill in Co." <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> philo wrote:
> There are *some* utilties that will allow access to NTFS partitions from
> DOS or Win98, at least as I recall. NTFS4DOS, NTFSDOS, and perhaps Bart
> PE(?), or something along those lines, if my memory serves me.

The Bart PE boot CD is built on the basis of WinXP and can access NTFS
partitions natively. This is why it is such a superb tool for
administrators.