Butch, I agree I think FAT32 is the only way to go with XP, and I think it would be easier for Linux to access it, as with DOS. NTFS does have larger clusters, and therefore wastes less space on storing files, but with the difference as minor as it is, compared to the size of drives, I see the trade-off of using FAT32 very worth it. Sure NTFS is more secure, but on home systems, with firewalls & all, how many of us need to worry about that anyway. Glenn ----- Original Message ----- From: "Butch Bussen" <butchb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> To: "Speakup is a screen review system for Linux." <speakup at braille.uwo.ca> Sent: Saturday, June 23, 2007 9:22 AM Subject: Re: A computer issue, how should I deal with this? Best solution? I think we're confusing fat 16 and fat 32. The 2 gig limit applies for fat 16, but when you run fdisk at the dos prompt, it says something like "your computer system can support a hard disk larger than-----" "Do you want to access this larger disk?" It is before coffee and way too early in the morning for me to try and figure out how they do it. I don't recall the numbers, I remember discussing this stuff years ago on cluster size. That is the smallest amount of space a file would take no matter if it were a one byte file. I think it started out at 2 then 4 then 8 then 16 then 32. Way to early to figure this out!!! 73s Butch Bussen wa0vjr _______________________________________________ Speakup mailing list Speakup at braille.uwo.ca http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
