I've been here for a few months and have learned a lot about emulating the look of macs, but i'm curious to know how their file system is in comparison to windows. i personally like windows methodology of folders, but was wondering if something else did it better (i don't have much experience in the other os')
thanks much
*waits for contra to come in* 
Originally posted by wookietv@Oct 27 2003, 12:35 AMi personally like windows methodology of folders...
Wait a second....I think we differ on our definitions of 'File System'.
All OS's use folders, whether they are graphically represented or accessed through a command line. So in that aspect, Mac, Wintel, and Linux are all the same- click a folder, and ta-da, there's crap inside.
When I hear 'File System', I think FAT, FAT32, or NTFS for Windows or HFS for Mac (Linux? No clue there...
).
So are you asking who has the superior File System (my definition), or who has the prettiest folder icons?
-godpunk
Is it possible to class one File System better than another..? I've never really understood the difference (apart from the difference between FAT16 and FAT32).
I used to use NTFS on a previous installation of WinXP, although I changed back to FAT32 after another format.
Anyone want to enlighten us what the difference is? 
Whats the difference between FAT32 and NTFS? Lots (the overall tone here is ALWAYS USE NTFS)
1. NTFS has meta-data journaling, whats that mean? No more scandisks and data loss
2. NTFS has built in file permissions and encyption. Whats that mean? A secure FS
3. NTFS has built in data redundancy, ie. less loss of data
FAT32 is sooo simple, its unsafe,that's why its writable in Linux.
But IMO, Linux has The best FS's by far (There's about 4 main ones):
1. ReiserFS4 is the fastest out there. Its literally 2x faster than everything out there. You will flip when it ships.
It also will have the best data integrity out there. It uses a database structure that makes sure ALL the data is journaled, not just meta-data.
2. ReiserFS3 is the fastest and safest of the current gen of File systems
3. ext2/3 sucks, its that simple
4. XFS is great on data integrity
5. JFS is very solid
I got the impression that wookietv speaks about the arrangement of folders, i.e: C:\Windows, C:\Program Files, C:\Documents and Settings\Username, etc.
Originally posted by contrasutra@Oct 27 2003, 01:16 PMWhats the difference between FAT32 and NTFS? Lots (the overall tone here is ALWAYS USE NTFS)
1. NTFS has meta-data journaling, whats that mean? No more scandisks and data loss
2. NTFS has built in file permissions and encyption. Whats that mean? A secure FS
3. NTFS has built in data redundancy, ie. less loss of data
FAT32 is sooo simple, its unsafe,that's why its writable in Linux.
But IMO, Linux has The best FS's by far (There's about 4 main ones):
1. ReiserFS4 is the fastest out there. Its literally 2x faster than everything out there. You will flip when it ships.
It also will have the best data integrity out there. It uses a database structure that makes sure ALL the data is journaled, not just meta-data.
2. ReiserFS3 is the fastest and safest of the current gen of File systems
3. ext2/3 sucks, its that simple
4. XFS is great on data integrity
5. JFS is very solid
You beat me to it, damnit! :6
I think I'd pretty much agree with everything you said contra... I must be ill 
Let's not forget to mention, for all those people who've only half-read longhorn stuff: WinFS is not a filing system - it's a database over NTFS
ntfs is a data base in itself though.. why didn't ms just build winfs into that instead of having to run an sql server on top?
linux is going to be amazing in 6 months time or so.. reiser4 and linux2.6...woo!
Originally posted by Fissy@Oct 27 2003, 02:14 PMntfs is a data base in itself though.. why didn't ms just build winfs into that instead of having to run an sql server on top?
linux is going to be amazing in 6 months time or so.. reiser4 and linux2.6...woo!
NTFS isn't a proper database, though...
The reason to put a SQL Server database on top is because it facilitates much more advanced querying, among other things...
what i mean is, could those functions not be built in to the ntfs database, if its not good enough, make it good enough.
Or would that be really sluggish?
i should shut my hole really, with ntfs staying as it is, linux should be able to access it still and use its own database, shouldn't it?
Originally posted by contrasutra@Oct 27 2003, 08:16 AM
But IMO, Linux has The best FS's by far (There's about 4 main ones):
1. ReiserFS4 is the fastest out there. Its literally 2x faster than everything out there. You will flip when it ships.
It also will have the best data integrity out there. It uses a database structure that makes sure ALL the data is journaled, not just meta-data.
2. ReiserFS3 is the fastest and safest of the current gen of File systems
3. ext2/3 sucks, its that simple
4. XFS is great on data integrity
5. JFS is very solid
Reiser is nice for some things...it's definately growing in popularity. I know that some people have complained of massive data loss using Reiser in the Linux forums that I regular...
ext2/3 don't suck. They might be a little old compared to others, but the reality is that they're rock solid and they're proven file systems. There is no surprise when using ext2/3. Everybody knows they work.
They're nowhere near as fast as Reiser, though.
Even RH runs ext b/c they know it's solid.
JFS isn't bad either...for some reason it doesn't appeal to me.
O.K. so is this poll polling our opinions on the way that the OS is organizing the files visually to the user, or the file structure on the HD? These are two different things!
I think..
1. Linux
2. OS X
3. NTFS
10. FAT 32
:order:
edit: @Contra: what about UFS? OS X supports HFS+ and UFS.
@taha: Funny you mentioned UFS. I'm installing OS 10.1.2 on it right as I type.
Apple sais UFS is Case Sencitive but thats about it. I wanted to try that sh## out.
4 mins left... Processing Essential Software.
In my opinion HFS and HFS+ is very covenient. Pretty fast too.
Originally posted by ihartmacz@Oct 27 2003, 10:05 AMI'm installing OS 10.1.2 on it...
You don't have Jaguar or Panther?
-godpunk
Originally posted by godpunk@Oct 27 2003, 04:05 AMAll OS's use folders, whether they are graphically represented or accessed through a command line. So in that aspect, Mac, Wintel, and Linux are all the same- click a folder, and ta-da, there's crap inside.
When I hear 'File System', I think FAT, FAT32, or NTFS for Windows or HFS for Mac (Linux? No clue there...
So are you asking who has the superior File System (my definition), or who has the prettiest folder icons?
-godpunk
i think there was a misunderstanding in this poll which i will up front apologize for... maybe my wording was a little confusing. ken got it right about when he mentioned the arrangement of folders, i.e: C:\Windows, C:\Program Files, C:\Documents and Settings\Username, etc. i guess it could have better stated e.g. "which o.s. folder system is the most user friendly" like i said, since i have not much experience with the other o.s., i didn't even know they also use a graphical folder arrangement.
but i guess we can adapt it to whatever you guys want to vote for... and since about 90%+ of the posts here are about the true meaning of file systems (ntfs, fat, etc.) that's what we'll go with from now. sorry about that again.
:police: oh my god put down that gun, i didn't mean to cause trouble...
:sone: what are you doing with that knife, i think this is going too far...
O.K. now that we got this settled, I'd say the Mac is the best because on the Mac you just have documents and your preferences. In Windows, you have My Documents which are not in C:\My Documents if you have multiple users. It would be C:/Documents and Settings/Username_Domain/My Documents. Also, by Windows nature, it splits it's information on prefrences and other user information all over the system. Too confusing. I really don't have much experience with the Linux side of it.
Originally posted by wookietv@Oct 27 2003, 01:31 PM:police: oh my god put down that gun, i didn't mean to cause trouble...
:sone: what are you doing with that knife, i think this is going too far...
You forgot about me! :godpunk:
-godpunk
Oh-no!! NOT THE DUCT TAPE!!
Well, in that case, the POSIX file system layout is the best (by VERY far):
/var
/lib
/usr
/bin
/opt
/doc
/src
/mnt
/etc
/home
And to stifle popular belief: OSX USES THIS TOO! They just have "symlinks"(ie, Aliases for you GUI types) to make it easier to read.
Taha: UFS is pretty bad. It doesnt have ANY sort of journaling, so its very much like ext2(ie. fast, but unstable).
UFS2 though has background snapshots (similar to journaling), but its still not stable.
So poor BSD users. 
EDIT:\\ I should explain why I like the POSIX system. , its better because once you know it, its consistant throughout the whole layout, so you learn the above directories, and you can navigate any POSIX system out there.
For example, tell me where documentation for Application Foo is on Windows? Maybe in the installation dir, maybe on the CD, maybe in the Windows Help system? You cant just "go there", you have to find it.
On POSIX, its always in a /doc dir, and manuals are in /man, so you know that if YOU installed the program, its in: /usr/doc.
Looking for an executable in Windows? It may be in the Application dir, it may be buried in there, there is no standard. In POSIX, its always in /bin.
Looking for a library? Same thing, in POSIX, its always in /lib.
yeah damn i love the POSIX layout too.. its amazing great layout
and its so much different then windows, makes you feel special lol
-bolero
I guess Macs have the most recoverable and easily indexable file system. :canadian: :canadian:
TweakUI (Windows PowerToy) allows you to change certain system folders, so you can rearrange your drive as you wish (Trying to access the Desktop or Temp folder is a pain)
I doubt that's it's similar in other OSes, but I hate the Windows way, where every installed app is allowed to throw a few files in Windows folder.
OS X definately.
They have the posix directory structure for unix but their native structure is easy:
/Applications -> Your apps
/Users -> user directories with all their preferences and user specific libraries in there
/Library -> machine wide settings and libraries modifiable by admin users
/System -> System wide defaults and libraries editable only by root
POSIX, its just intuitive.
Aqua-Soft Forums