ipod madness

Gabriel Dragffy dragffy at yandex.ru
Thu Apr 27 04:50:45 UTC 2006


You may well be correct, it is a long time since I got myself worried about 
these things. If I remember correctly from NTFS (fairly similar to FAT32) if 
you were using huge hard drives then you did need to increase the cluster 
size to be able to use them, but hat only rally applied to server kind of 
environments. As far as home computing went it was best to choose a cluster 
size that more appropriately reflected the kind of files that would be 
stored.  I'll have a look  on the net for some information, it would be good 
to know if my assumptions are misplaced!

> I could be wrong, but I understood that the limitation on windows
> partitions and on block size choices is that the FAT cannot grow.  Hence
> the total number of blocks in a partition is limited, and therefore blocks
> must be bigger (and less efficient) to use the available space in the
> partition.
>
> The improvement of FAT32 over FAT16 was a larger partition table that
> allowed for smaller blocks and/or larger partitions (if larger blocks are
> used).




More information about the kubuntu-users mailing list