Re: vfat not seen by Vista
- From: class_a <class_a@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2007 08:20:37 -0400
Hans-Peter Diettrich wrote:
<interesting explanation snipped>
In your case, I'd suspect that the mere size of the volume can cause
trouble. VFAT volumes up to 4 or 32 GB might be compatible with more
Windows versions, than are larger volumes. The larger a volume, the
higher the risk that a bug in Windows will bite you, sooner or later.
I've just realised something after reading a comment by VWWall. My
memory must be fading with age because I _didn't_ format the entire USB
hard drive (500Gb) with WinXP. I did try to do that with WinXP but it
kept barfing, and probably for the reason VWWall gives (partition size
32Gb). To format the entire HD as a single Fat32 device I had to usethe Maxtor disk partitioning tool. That is what made it visible in both
operating systems. Maybe the Maxtor partitioning tools doesn't have the
bugs you mention in XP? Just a thought.
Yes, I know it would make more sense to have the drive split into a few
partitions, but it's purely for storage so I don't really care :)
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: vfat not seen by Vista
- From: David Bolt
- Re: vfat not seen by Vista
- From: Hans-Peter Diettrich
- Re: vfat not seen by Vista
- References:
- vfat not seen by Vista
- From: Chris
- Re: vfat not seen by Vista
- From: Vlad_Inhaler
- Re: vfat not seen by Vista
- From: Chris
- Re: vfat not seen by Vista
- From: class_a
- Re: vfat not seen by Vista
- From: Hans-Peter Diettrich
- vfat not seen by Vista
- Prev by Date: Re: insufficient space to complete yast update
- Next by Date: Re: wireless connection keeps dropping
- Previous by thread: Re: vfat not seen by Vista
- Next by thread: Re: vfat not seen by Vista
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|