Happy 30th Birthday “New Technology” File System! Thanks for 30 years of demonstrating Linux superiority with a gap that widens with every new kernel release 👍

  • Dubious_Fart
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    31
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    His list is so expansive he cant even list one item from it in response.

    • Dax87@forum.stellarcastle.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      The only reason why there’s NTFS hate in the Linux community is because it’s associated with windows.

      This tribalism bullshit is tiring.

        • Dax87@forum.stellarcastle.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Yes, NTFS lacks features that surely one of the many Linux filesystems have. But it also has features others do not. There is no one-siize-fits-all filesystem.

          • Ext4 is generally faster than NTFS, but cannot handle as large of files
          • ZFS has a multitude of features that NTFS does not, like zraid, dedup, etc., but usually at the cost of RAM.
          • BTRFS is included in the Linux kernel and also has many features, like being able to conveniently switch hard drive raid-like configurations on the fly with rebalance, but doesn’t support fs-level encryption
          • NTFS lacks in many features the others do not, and is a “non-standard” filesystem. However, it’s one of the few with better cross-platform support, more advanced access control, pre-emptive journaling, reparse points, etc.

          It’s quite obvious that my calling out tribalism has felt to you an attack.

          We get enough of this “us vs them” mentality in literally every topic and medium. I’d just like a little more nuance and genuine discourse. So I apologize if I’ve offended you.

          • neo (he/him)@lemmy.comfysnug.space
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Ext4 is generally faster than NTFS, but cannot handle as large of files

            Going to be honest with you, this has not been my experience.

            And you can imagine whatever you want, but that doesn’t make it reality.

            • Dax87@forum.stellarcastle.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              ? Imagine? 16 exabytes for NTFS according to multiple sources, like Wikipedia and Microsoft documents, and 16 terabytes for ext4.

              If you want to refute that then it’s most likely you have just had some unlucky experience, and at best it’s anecdotal.

              Considering your rather disingenuous second sentence, I can see that you are not here to engage in conversation, but to troll. You’re exactly what nobody needs buddy. Cya.

    • nakal@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I’ll try. Short: It’s not as powerful as ZFS.

      Examples:

      • no low cost snapshots (don’t harm performance)
      • no checksums, no self-healing
      • 256 TB limit
      • magical reserved $ and OneDrive filenames
      • magical 8.3 mapping
      • broken standard API calls (CreateFileW instead of fopen)
      • Sikeen
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        also ntfs doesn’t support many common symbols. so you can’t use them