• Yuumi
    link
    fedilink
    English
    42 years ago

    It was new at the time. Anyway, what is the best file system to use nowadays? zfs?

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      5
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      ZFS is brilliant and all, as long as you only add disks, too bad if you want to rearrange your disks, you have to buy a new set of disks and move the data.

      Btrfs is much better for home use, combine your old 3, 4 and 8tb disks into one, buy a new 16tb disk you add it and remove the 3tb disk.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      82 years ago

      I think zfs is very popular with the honeserver crowd, but its not worth the hassle for desktop use. If you want something more fancy than ext4 there is btrfs which lets you take snapshots and checksums the data to detect corruption

  • Hovenko
    link
    fedilink
    182 years ago

    But they change UI design every time Bill farts

  • TimeSquirrel
    link
    fedilink
    30
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    Haha, there’s still things embedded deep in code and in CPUs that go way back to the 80s. If only y’all knew. It’s all shit built on top of older shit, built on top of even older shit with kludges and hacks to glue it all together. Know why Windows has five different ways to access the same setting? Because if they get rid of the older methods, they break a ton of other shit that depends on it too. A house of cards or a Jenga tower.

    A modern PC can STILL natively boot a DOS floppy from 1986 in legacy BIOS mode because of this.

    Theres also examples in the corporate world where some companies are STILL running 70s mainframes, and use shiny new PCs as front end terminals that just connect to the same old backend.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      22 years ago

      This is super interesting and I had NO IDEA! Makes me very curious how much more efficient an entire fresh start might be with new tech.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        22 years ago

        Fresh starts are always tempting, but they mean throwing out a ton of babies with that bathwater. Re-making old mistakes and solving them with fresh kludges in your nice, new, clean solution.

        Like everything else in engineering, it’s a balancing act.

      • TimeSquirrel
        link
        fedilink
        6
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        Yeah I can’t even think of any recent CPUs that aren’t based on previous designs. Even Apple’s new M1 is an ARM derivative, which itself is based on an ancient computer from the 80s known as the “Acorn”.

        It’s a bit poetic. They were directly competing with Apple at the time, and Acorn named themselves such so that they would appear in front of Apple in the phone book. Of course, they haven’t existed in a long time, but 35-40 years later, Apple decides to use the great-grandson of Acorn’s CPU in their new products.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        3
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        CPU architecture wise, you can see the difference between cluttered, old x86 and ARM or even RISC-V chips. They just run so much more efficient, as you can tell with your phone lasting a day or two, or apple silicon consuming a fraction for the same performance.

        An example for the ancient backend would be the flight pathing system DAL. (Wendover video)

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      22 years ago

      Yeah, just don’t look deeper into symlinks in NTFS . And don’t look for extended file attributes in task scheduler.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            32 years ago

            Windows 2000 was definitely peak, for its time.

            but Windows 7 eclipsed it, and remains the best microsoft OS… I will fight and die on this hill <3

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        32 years ago

        Seriously, each new windows update just adds a fresh new coat of paint on top, as if to make finding the actually useful win 7 and xp menus, that are still there, harder.

        Linux Mint feels to me like what windows 10/11 should’ve been

  • Justas🇱🇹
    link
    fedilink
    162 years ago

    Never name anything with “New” in the name, it will look silly after a few years.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    142 years ago

    Yeah, new technology because it was the file system for Windows NT, which originally stood for… Windows New Technology.

    Later Microsoft decided to just use NT as a moniker without any indication of it’s origins.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    2
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    I mean, it’s still way better than Fat, but incredibly incompatible with a lot of things still and new usb drives are always FAT. Shame ntfs didn’t catch on more.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      2
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      External storage is always FAT, because everything can read FAT, so it just makes life easier for file transfers.

      Not because NTFS/ext4/etc doesnt work on usb sticks.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        12 years ago

        Yeah, but that’s the shame. Ntfs been around for decades, would be great for usb as it allows faster transfer speeds and more secure. Would have been nice if more devices included it so it wasn’t such a compatibility barrier.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          -12 years ago

          I’d rather have universal compatibility myself.

          besides, its not like you cant reformat it to NTFS. They just come stock as fat so you can access them on any device.