Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

Return to index: [Subject] [Thread] [Date] [Author]

Re: Windows 98

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
So, Bill, are you saying that with NTFS, that a 2kb file doesn't take up 16
or 32kb space on a HDD?

Bill Allen

BTW, I agree that it is ridiculous that Win98 feels the need to hang onto
any DOS roots. Anybody who is interested in Win98 probably hasn't run a DOS
app in years with the possible exception of Roger Turk (just kidding,

-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Polhemus <polhemus(--nospam--at)>
To: 'seaoc(--nospam--at)' <seaoc(--nospam--at)>
Date: Monday, May 04, 1998 12:48 PM
Subject: RE: Windows 98

-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Allen, S.E. [SMTP:billallen(--nospam--at)]
Sent: Monday, May 04, 1998 1:59 PM
To: seaoc(--nospam--at)
Subject: Re: Windows 98

I'm sure your meant that the OSR2 version of Windows95 (affectionately known
as Win95B) *frees* a good deal of hard drive space. This is due to the fact
that Win95B formats the HDD in 4kb clusters (instead of 16kb or 32kb
clusters) essentially regardless of the size of the HDD. You do have to
reformat your HDD to use this feature, but I found it to be very valuable in
preserving HDD space. Strangely enough, I believe this feature does not
exist with NT4 and will not be a feature in NT5.

[Bill Polhemus]

[Bill Polhemus]

It is irrelevant with respect to Windows NT (as it was in those happy days
when I could still use my beloved OS/2).  Windows NT, like OS/2 before it,
used a high-performance file system, NTFS, which does not suffer from the
vicissitudes that FAT-based systems use.

I think it's ludicrous that Windows 98 is still stuck with FAT, a system
that was developed back when a 30 MB drive was considered "huge."

MS gives you what it wants to give you.  After all, "they know MORE than you