Ken Schneider wrote: > James Knott pecked at the keyboard and wrote: > >> File systems, such as HPFS and ext2 try to resist fragmenting, by >> storing a file in the smallest free space that will hold it and only >> fragment if a big enough contiguous free space does not exist. This >> means fragmentation is unlikely, until the drive is almost full. On the >> other hand, FAT and (IIRC) NTFS simply grab the next available free >> space, whether big enough or not and if necessary, additional blocks of >> free space, until there's room for the file. This means that it might >> save a file in multiple pieces, when it could have simply found a single >> block that was large enough. >> >> > > Perhaps MS is waiting for another company to innovate this idea so that > they can buy the company. Has MS done anything but buy innovation lately > and call it their own? Don't remember the last time they came up with > anything of their own. > > As I mentioned, they came up with HPFS and HPFS386, which is used in OS/2 servers, so there's no reason why they couldn't have used either. HPFS386 supports user permissions etc., which the basic HPFS doesn't. One thing they did do, was use the same file system number for NTFS as used for HPFS, which confuses some disk utility programs. Windows NT supported HPFS and I believe it was an optional install for Windows 2000.
-- Use OpenOffice.org <http://www.openoffice.org> -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
