On Dec 8, 2013, at 6:07 PM, Fernando Cassia <fcassia(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Sun, Dec 8, 2013 at 10:00 PM, Chris Murphy
<lists(a)colorremedies.com> wrote:
> FAT32 isn't useful for mass storage of video files because of its 4GB file size
limit. And exFAT/FAT64 is not only patent encumbered, but it also uses only one FAT so
it's actually less resilient in the face of any kind of corruption, and isn't
intended for this use case.
>
> They should probably use NTFS instead.
Oh really? I must have imagined then my 8GB and 16GB flash drives
formatted as FAT32.
I'm uncertain why you think you've imagined it. FAT32 supports 2TB volume sizes
for 512byte sector media. Repairing them is fairly straightforward, although it takes
longer than with a journaled file system. While not yet cross platform like FAT32, f2fs is
shaping up to be a better alternative for SD and USB flash media.
And my TDT STB recording to it and splitting the
recording into several 4GB files seamlessly. ;-)
Great, you have something that's able to work around the file size limitation, in
which case use FAT32.
None of the TVs I have with USB ports support NTFS, one does exFAT,
the other doesn't, only supports FAT32.
Right, your user choice is being limited by what is essentially proprietary hardware - the
TVs. But also unfortunate timing, in that there haven't been significantly better
alternatives to FAT32 that address resilience, volume size, and file size limitations.
If the TVs mount either filesystem read-only, I'd be more tolerant of their use for
this use case. And maybe they do this already. Offhand I'm not thinking why a TV would
need mount media as read-write.
There are still open questions on its legal status as indicated in your own link.
Chris Murphy