| ActiveMac | Anonymous | Create a User | Reviews | News | Forums | Advertise |
|
|
|
User Controls |
|
New User |
|
Login |
|
Edit/View My Profile |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ActiveMac |
|
Articles |
|
Forums |
|
Links |
|
News |
|
News Search |
|
Reviews |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
News Centers |
|
Windows/Microsoft |
|
DVD |
|
ActiveHardware |
|
Xbox |
|
MaINTosh |
|
News Search |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ANet Chats |
|
The Lobby |
|
Special Events Room |
|
Developer's Lounge |
|
XBox Chat |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ's |
|
Windows 98/98 SE |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Windows Me |
|
Windows "Whistler" XP |
|
Windows CE |
|
Internet Explorer 6 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Xbox |
|
DirectX |
|
DVD's |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TopTechTips |
|
Registry Tips |
|
Windows 95/98 |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Internet Explorer 4 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Windows NT Tips |
|
Program Tips |
|
Easter Eggs |
|
Hardware |
|
DVD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Latest Reviews |
|
Applications |
|
Microsoft Windows XP Professional |
|
Norton SystemWorks 2002 |
|
|
|
Hardware |
|
Intel Personal Audio Player 3000 |
|
Microsoft Wireless IntelliMouse Explorer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Site News/Info |
|
About This Site |
|
Affiliates |
|
ANet Forums |
|
Contact Us |
|
Default Home Page |
|
Link To Us |
|
Links |
|
Member Pages |
|
Site Search |
|
Awards |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credits |
 |
Microsoft file patent faces exam | |
|
||
| Time: 13:40 EST/18:40 GMT | News Source: ZDNet | Posted By: Robert Stein | ||
|
A U.S. government agency agreed this week to re-examine a controversial Microsoft patent on the Windows file format, following an objection from a public-interest group. In April, the Public Patent Foundation asked the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office to revoke a patent that covers the FAT (File Allocation Table) file system--the older of two main systems used by Windows to store files. Last year, Microsoft said it was seeking to license the FAT patent on reasonable terms as part of a broader push toward sharing its intellectual-property portfolio with the industry | ||
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 157 Last | Next |
The time now is
7:39:35 AM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
| #1 By 7754 (216.160.8.41) at 6/13/2004 1:38:28 AM |
|
Parkker, you're way overzealous with the support for NTFS. Yes, it is a great filesystem, but it has its place. Flash media is generally not one of those. The reason is not exactly that it requires "too many system resources" as Halcyon-X12 states broadly, but that it's just not very efficient on small volumes. FAT is a better choice for anything around 400 MB or less.
Halcyon-X12, your anecdotal evidence is exactly that. I have not had a problem with NTFS since NT4, which of course is also anecdotal. But there are tons upon tons of servers out there running NTFS without trouble. I'm not sure what you're referencing when you say W2k didn't work properly with NTFS at one point in time... can you please provide some references on that? I've followed W2k very closely, and this is the first I've heard of that. And, I would venture to guess that NTFS itself was not responsible for "corrupting the registry"--that wouldn't even make sense. You're pointing out the wrong culprit. For problems that could have caused a corrupt registry, look elsewhere, not at the filesystem. If you found Windows 2000 more reliable after SP4, it wasn't because of NTFS--the fixes for NTFS for SP4 were for situations that are very rarely encountered. And if they weren't rarely encountered, they would have been fixed far before SP4, since not much is going to work if NTFS doesn't work. NT4 wasn't as bad as you and Mr. Dee make it out to be (at least after a few SPs were out), but of course it's not on the same level of W2k. Come on folks, enough of the hyperbole... leave that up to the politicians. |
| #2 By 23071 (210.50.172.16) at 6/13/2004 11:18:24 AM |
|
RE: #3 By Parkker (409 Posts) at 6/12/2004 2:11:37 PM
Please, put the notch of the fanboy setting to atleast 1. Sure, I'm no Linux fanboy, I can't stand it, and use FreeBSD at every opportunity, however, lets get one thing straight, there is more to linux than ext3/ext2fs. XFS, ReiserFS which is a based on a concept that had yet to be put into practice, and JFS. So lets top with the hype and look at the facts. This post was edited by kaiwai on Sunday, June 13, 2004 at 11:19. |
| #3 By 23071 (210.50.172.13) at 6/13/2004 10:16:35 PM |
|
RE #31 By Parkker (415 Posts) at 6/13/2004 7:21:03 PM
You silly little boy, may I suggest that you go to namesys.com and look at the difference between the reiserfs approach to filesystems vs the traditional sector/clustor/etc way of managing the drive. Btw, Reiserfs was not journaled until later on. |
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 157 Last | Next |
The time now is
7:39:35 AM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
