TM> That somewhat dilutes the advantage of FAT32. No advantage to FAT32
TM> on anything < 256 MB, including the Zip 250.
Ricsi>?? 256 MB ?? shouldn't that be 256 GB ;)
FAT32 was invented to support large disks.
When you want to fdisk a partition smaller than 1 GB it even warns you not
to use FAT32 ...
Personal computers are not up to 256 GB, but maybe in another year or two...
Iomega Zip 250 is 250 MB. FAT16 allocation unit on partition just under 1 GB is
16384 bytes, so there might possibly be an advantage to FAT32. But FAT32 may be
headed for obsolescence in favor of NTFS since MS's next Windows, both consumer
and business versions, will be built on NT. So I have one more reason not to
bother with FAT32.
Now I wonder what happens if one tries to format a partition with DOS or OS/2
that has been Win98-FDISKed for FAT32. Maybe DOS or OS/2 FDISK would see no
drive letter?
TM> I once downloaded the Win98E emergency bootdisk image from
TM> http://www.bootdisk.com, to see if it would read my DOS partitions,
TM> and it failed on the DOS partition on my second hard disk ("Invalid
TM> media")
Ricsi>M$ DOS is pretty strict ...
Or do you mean buggy? MS-DOS 6.22 FDISK doesn't work at all on my system, at
least not FDISK /status which just swoons with blinking underline cursor in the
lower left corner of an otherwise blank screen, then I have to Ctrl-Alt-Del.
I don't want to risk messing things up, trashing my data, with FDISK on Win98SE
boot diskette.
Ricsi>but everytime DOS told me that, partition magic told me the same ...
linux fdisk worked.
You mean Partition Magic failed where Linux fdisk succeeded? But Linux fdisk
can't resize partitions without trashing the data.
