| TIP: Click on subject to list as thread! | ANSI |
| echo: | |
|---|---|
| to: | |
| from: | |
| date: | |
| subject: | Re: FAT32 and NTFS on same box? |
From: "Rich"
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_051F_01C33845.04763360
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Assuming the page to which you referred is accurate regarding cluster =
size before and after conversion, and see no reason to dispute what it =
says on that topic, your claims are exactly backwards. Don't you read =
the stuff to which you refer?
Since you are the one making claims why haven't you provided any =
technical detail to support your claims? Note that your use of
"piglike = disk performance" is not technical detail.
Rich
"Frank Haber" wrote in message =
news:3ef4ec4a{at}w3.nls.net...
I notice a conspicuous lack of technical detail in your posts. I =
await that.
------=_NextPart_000_051F_01C33845.04763360
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Assuming
the page to which =
you=20
referred is accurate regarding cluster size before and after conversion, = and see=20
no reason to dispute what it says on that topic, your claims are exactly =
backwards. Don't you read the stuff to which you =
refer?
Since you
are the one =
making claims=20
why haven't you provided any technical detail to support your =
claims? Note=20
that your use of "piglike disk performance" is not technical=20
detail.
Rich
* Origin: Barktopia BBS Site http://HarborWebs.com:8081 (1:379/45)SEEN-BY: 633/267 270 @PATH: 379/45 1 633/267 |
|
| SOURCE: echomail via fidonet.ozzmosis.com | |
Email questions or comments to sysop@ipingthereforeiam.com
All parts of this website painstakingly hand-crafted in the U.S.A.!
IPTIA BBS/MUD/Terminal/Game Server List, © 2025 IPTIA Consulting™.