From: Mike '/m' 


Rarely do I need to do a chkdsk /f as a result of the frequent BSOD.   So,
yes, NTFS does help.  But it is like a Band-AidR, I'd much rather that the
BSOD's disappear.



On Mon, 16 Aug 2004 20:09:00 -0400, "Gary Britt"
 wrote:

>Certainly I agree.  Does the journaling really make that much of a
>difference on a non-raid single idea or scsi drive as regards safety and
>non-file corruption compared to Fat32?
>
>Gary
>
>"Mike '/m'"  wrote in message
>news:koi2i0tvv2ncpq9m7a694qsdjj5pgtrlvd{at}4ax.com...
>>
>> Tolerance of BSOD's is a feature for me.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, 16 Aug 2004 07:17:54 -0400, "Robert Comer"
>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >The biggest plus of NTFS is the journaling, and what that means is it
>> >basically can take things like power outages and BSOD's much better
>without
>> >corruption of files.
>> >
>> >- Bob Comer
>> >
>> >
>> >"Gary Britt"  wrote
in message
>> >news:41208615$1{at}w3.nls.net...
>> >> If you don't need NTFS for security, are there other
reasons why you
>would
>> >> prefer NTFS over FAT32?  I like being able to do things
with the Win2K
>on
>> >> Fat32 partition that I can't so easily do if it were
NTFS.  What are
>your
>> >> thoughts on this?
>> >>
>> >> Gary
>> >>
>> >> "Ellen K"  wrote in message
>> >> news:a09911.061078{at}harborwebs.com...
>> >>> So, that's a big deal.  Who uses FAT any more anyway?
 (Although here
>> >>> it's
>> >> on
>> >>> the C drive of my desktop.  But I made them format
the second HDD
>NTFS.)
>> >>>
>> >>> > From: "Geo." 
>> >>> > "Ellen K."
 wrote in
>message
>> >>> > news:sos4h0lciqhcjk25tgm2r02tuk07ihcqva{at}4ax.com...
>> >>> >> That is really impressive.
>> >>> > Only because nobody else has done it on NTFS,
heck on FAT it's a
>> >> standard
>> >>> > feature.
>> >>> > Geo.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>>
>

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5