Come to #ubuntuforums! We have cookies! | Basic Ubuntu Security Guide
Tomorrow's an illusion and yesterday's a dream, today is a solution...
That much I already knew, but what confuses me is the inconsistency with Mac-NTFS compatibility. Back in late 2006 I bought a Leopard iMac (or maybe it was 10.4, whatever was newest at the time) that could read/write NTFS with its factory-default state before AND after I used BootCamp to install NTFS Winblows XP. Macs I used later could read, but not write, except one ancient PowerPC Mac that couldn't read NTFS or FAT32, but see them in the Disc Utility. This new Macbook I'm using that was mentioned before in the topic, which is Snow Leopard, couldn't even see the disk as a filesystem (Disk Utility said unknown or something like that) until I installed NTFS-3G. So, what gives?
He's saying that Windows XP isn't new or maintained enough to handle the new FAT32, and therefor it assumes FAT32 cannot handle more than 2GB files and so it has a hardcoded limit with copying/moving to FAT32. Just like it has a hardcoded limit that doesn't let it read more than one partition on an external HD. Damn, Windows sucks.
So XP doesn't support this "64kb cluster" thing?
Come to #ubuntuforums! We have cookies! | Basic Ubuntu Security Guide
Tomorrow's an illusion and yesterday's a dream, today is a solution...
UbuntuGuide/KubuntuGuide
Right now the killer is being surrounded by a web of deduction, forensic science,
and the latest in technology such as two-way radios and e-mail.
Back when XP was new, NTFS wasn't made yet. Or at least it wasn't commonly used yet. At that stage, XP used FAT32, and at that stage, FAT32 could only handle 2GB files. It was a bit after Windows adopted NTFS that FAT32 was upgraded to handle 4GB files, but that new file size limit was never implemented in XP. Therefor, when XP sees a FAT32 drive, it reads it as the old FAT32, before the new size limits, and doesn't let you copy bigger files.
I'm sure FAT16 also started with a smaller limit, but I don't know anything about that.
They can, but they need extra drivers. I don't have the links handy; try Googling for them. Also, although I've used such drivers briefly, I've not used them extensively, so I don't know from firsthand experience how reliable they are. Oh, one more caveat: These drivers work with ext2fs and ext3fs, but not with ext4fs. IMHO, that's not a big deal if you plan ahead; ext4fs doesn't offer enough new features or speed improvements for its use to be all that compelling on most typical installations. Even if you do need it, you could set aside a separate ext3fs data transfer partition. That's better from a safety viewpoint, anyhow; it's best not to give Windows, or even OS X, access to a Linux root filesystem.
That is curious. In 2006 I bought a Mac Mini with Tiger (or whichever cat 10.4 was). It could read NTFS but not write. I did an upgrade to Leopard with an Archive and Install and ditto. Then I did a straight upgrade to Snow Leopard (no archive and install Leopard > Snow Leopard) and the OS could still recognise and read NTFS. Until I installed NTFS-3g.
Odd.
Ubuntu 20.04 Desktop Guide - Ubuntu 22.04 Desktop Guide - Forum Guide to BBCode - Using BBCode code tags
Member: Not Canonical Team
If you need help with your forum account, such as SSO login issues, username changes, etc, the correct place to contact an admin is here. Please do not PM me about these matters unless you have been asked to - unsolicited PMs concerning forum accounts will be ignored.
Come to #ubuntuforums! We have cookies! | Basic Ubuntu Security Guide
Tomorrow's an illusion and yesterday's a dream, today is a solution...
AFAIK, that's not possible; OS X 10.4 and 10.5 did not include read/write NTFS support, even in disabled form. I can think of several possible explanations for your observation. The most likely are that the disk in question was actually FAT or that you'd installed NTFS-3g or some other NTFS read/write driver without realizing it.
This is consistent with what I understand, with the possible exception of FAT32 support. I was under the impression that FAT32 was supported from the start in OS X, although I'm not positive of that. I'm not sure when support was added in pre-X versions of Mac OS.Macs I used later could read, but not write, except one ancient PowerPC Mac that couldn't read NTFS or FAT32, but see them in the Disc Utility.
One possible explanation is that the partition's type code was set incorrectly, or marked as "hidden," perhaps by a boot loader. It could also be that the filesystem was improperly unmounted, too; perhaps the regular OS X driver is conservative about mounting such filesystems, but NTFS-3g is more willing to take chances. (That's highly speculative on my part, though.)This new Macbook I'm using that was mentioned before in the topic, which is Snow Leopard, couldn't even see the disk as a filesystem (Disk Utility said unknown or something like that) until I installed NTFS-3G. So, what gives?
BTW, Snow Leopard does include read/write NTFS support, but it's disabled by default. People who have enabled it often report that it sometimes damages NTFS volumes; no doubt that's why this support was disabled by default.
Bookmarks