Wednesday, August 21st 2024

Microsoft Updates the 30-year-old FAT32 File-system with 2TB Volume Size Limits

by
btarunr
 Discuss (61 Comments)
With the latest Insider update to Windows 11, Microsoft refreshed its 30-year-old FAT32 file-system with support for a maximum volume size of 2 TB. The file-system was limited to 32 GB until now. This update, however, does not change the maximum file-size limit of 4 GB. The move is probably aimed at making life easy for enterprises using the file-system for whatever reason, or for high capacity removable media to have better cross-platform support (eg: to video equipment). If you mainly move files within a Windows ecosystem, it's highly recommended that you stick to NTFS as it offers security features and support for larger files, which FAT32 doesn't.
Source: Notebook Check

Related News

Add your own comment

61 Comments on Microsoft Updates the 30-year-old FAT32 File-system with 2TB Volume Size Limits

#26
R0H1T
I'm not advocating for FAT or NTFS. As for destroying volumes they can be restored so long as MFT is intact. It's not just contingent upon the OS but application as well. A lot of professional applications on Windows will let you do almost anything with a disk so long as the underlying OS supports it, or get a live/boot CD to bypass some restrictions. The only problem is you have to pay for them. I don't expect similar options available through "dumb" command line (free) tools anytime soon though.
Posted on Reply
#27
Dr. Dro
I wonder why Microsoft has refused to adopt ReFS as the primary Windows file system. It's been around for long enough the newness argument just does not hold anymore IMHO. Instead they just decided to elitize it by restricting its availability instead. ReFS can only be deployed from a Windows Pro for Workstations, Server or Enterprise SKU, the regular Windows 10/11 Pro cannot deploy ReFS since 1709 I believe.
Posted on Reply
#28
R0H1T
Dr. Drothe regular Windows 10/11 Pro cannot deploy ReFS since 1709 I believe
Forced segmentation/upsell or something?
Posted on Reply
#29
Dr. Dro
R0H1TForced segmentation/upsell or something?
Yeah, that seems to be the case. But it remains unbootable, which is just insane in my book. I think NTFS is so ingrained into the Windows architecture by now that there must be so many hurdles and issues that they just can't get rid of it anymore
Posted on Reply
#30
chrcoluk
I think its segmentation, the same reason applocker isnt routinely deployed on consumer machines.
Posted on Reply
#31
Chaitanya
user556ExFAT has now been open sourced, so that might be out of date to say it requires licensing still.
When did that happen? Hopefully that will bring about much need change in those consumer devices that are stuck with max of 32GB limit on storage devices.
Posted on Reply
#32
R0H1T
user556ExFAT has now been open sourced, so that might be out of date to say it requires licensing still.
That's only partially true ~
How can an OEM use exFAT in Linux without paying any patent fees to Microsoft?
Microsoft is a member of the Open Innovation Network (OIN). This membership provides a defensive patent commitment to all OIN members. Thus, if an OEM is a member of OIN, then their use of exFAT does not require paying a patent fee to Microsoft.

www.paragon-software.com/exfat-license
Posted on Reply
#33
TheinsanegamerN
DaemonForceThe firmware updates require FAT32?
I've updated my X570 TUF a few times but I just grab a 1GB USB stick and dump ROM to the FAT16 partition.
It makes security sense that it wouldn't understand NTFS or any modern FS.
If I need to use a bigger USB flash I'm probably making one big NTFS/ReFS and consistently booting from that.

That's so weird. Is this an issue for the antique XPe carputers? Ain't no waaaay.

That's insane. What kind of firmware has that much freedom?
I'll give you another example. Dell's Image Assist tool will ONLY boot from a FAT32 dive. Anything else and it immediately fails out.
Dr. DroYeah, that seems to be the case. But it remains unbootable, which is just insane in my book. I think NTFS is so ingrained into the Windows architecture by now that there must be so many hurdles and issues that they just can't get rid of it anymore
Likely, the same reason windows domain names are STILL limited to 15 characters, with no special characters. Because whomever coded that for windows 3.1 is no long at MS and nobody knows how to change it without breaking things.
Posted on Reply
#34
Wirko
Dr. DroI think NTFS is so ingrained into the Windows architecture by now that there must be so many hurdles and issues that they just can't get rid of it anymore
That seems likely, yes. Similar to the Windows GUI, which apparently no one knows how to separate from the rest of the system. (I'm aware there's been an attempt at that, the Windows Server Core, but its functionality and compatibility are limited; it's an afterthought, unlike in Linux.)
Posted on Reply
#35
matar
Finaly . Came too too late but better then never...
Posted on Reply
#36
Solaris17
Super Dainty Moderator
Dr. DroI wonder why Microsoft has refused to adopt ReFS as the primary Windows file system. It's been around for long enough the newness argument just does not hold anymore IMHO. Instead they just decided to elitize it by restricting its availability instead. ReFS can only be deployed from a Windows Pro for Workstations, Server or Enterprise SKU, the regular Windows 10/11 Pro cannot deploy ReFS since 1709 I believe.
It actually is! Atleast in server land! especially if creating storage spaces clusters. Its also the recommended and preferred FS for disks running VMs. The current limitation is you cannot boot from REFS which is likely why they dont make it the recommended option.
Posted on Reply
#37
RJARRRPCGP
FAT32=1996, with Windows 95 OSR2. (28 years ago this year)

Except for NTFS on Windows NT, I never heard of FAT32 before that! Fun fact: The retail Windows 95 never got the update that the OEMs got! A bunch, had to use FAT16! That means 2 GB partitions. (or similar)

So 30 years ago, nearly everyone used FAT16.

Fun fact: Windows 98 didn't have a 32 GB limit for FAT32. Also Windows XP can read them. It's just that there was a limit for partition sizes added to the XP installer. Possibly with all of NT5 as well.

So if you wanted FAT32 for one partition on that brand new 80 GB HDD back in 2002 for Windows 98 SE (or NT5 for an 80 GB backup drive)->format it in MS-DOS.
(The MS-DOS environment that comes with Windows 98 or Windows 95 OSR2)
_roman_vfat
Fun fact: VFAT was mostly rolled out, starting with Windows 95 and all versions of RTM Windows 95 has it. It's literally for having long file names on FAT16.
Posted on Reply
#39
RJARRRPCGP
csendesmarkWhy?
We have exFAT...
Yep, I'm disappointed! This is why we have to rely on the nearly-30-year-old FS, for UEFI!

Makes me want to have AMI and Phoenix consider the Ext FS from Linux or the F2FS (IIRC) (Samsung open sourced it, I believe)

The FAT32 FS is known for the file-size-limit gotcha! No more than 3.9 GiB, IIRC.
Posted on Reply
#40
user556
NTFS is over 30 years old too. Old doesn't mean obsolete.
Posted on Reply
#41
RJARRRPCGP
user556NTFS is over 30 years old too. Old doesn't mean obsolete.
Unfortunately, FAT doesn't seem to age as well into the 2020s. The file-size-limit gotcha! That means a lot of people who want to back up, will experience an error!
Posted on Reply
#42
user556
R0H1Twww.paragon-software.com/exfat-license
Okay, looks like that is Linux only for the time being. Patents expire in 2027.
RJARRRPCGPUnfortunately, FAT doesn't seem to age as well into the 2020s. The file-size-limit gotcha! That means a lot of people who want to back up, will experience an error!
Funnily, ExFAT is actually used by USB drives and SD cards. No software driver is needed at that end. Windoze obviously supports ExFAT.
Royalties will only apply to devices like cameras and phones where the software is needed. And guess what? Most of those use Linux where the royalties have been wavered. So ExFAT is practically free.
Posted on Reply
#43
RJARRRPCGP
user556So ExFAT is practically free.
Apparently, it will pretty much be as free as the usual Nvidia driver package, where a lot of Linux distro developers will frown, because the patent hasn't expired and/or a license restriction.
It will be like GIF 20 years ago.
Posted on Reply
#45
Frank_100
DaemonForceFAT32 is an archaic temporary solution to borrowed trouble. I still don't understand what people mean when they yap about a 32GB limit when that was my ENTIRE 80GB volume for a few years under Win95, Win2K then WinXP. You think pre-WinPE I'm going to be jumping back and forth between my data volumes without a read guarantee? Times have changed and we've moved on hell far. I don't know who's still using FAT32 in current year but NTFS is way more solid now (XP and newer) and with any luck we'll be able to make better use of ReFS real soon. Not all of us need the security features of NTFS in a Windows ecosystem. ✔
Microsoft is still using FAT32.

100MB first or second partition of your C drive.
Posted on Reply
#46
Onasi
Dr. DroI wonder why Microsoft has refused to adopt ReFS as the primary Windows file system. It's been around for long enough the newness argument just does not hold anymore IMHO. Instead they just decided to elitize it by restricting its availability instead. ReFS can only be deployed from a Windows Pro for Workstations, Server or Enterprise SKU, the regular Windows 10/11 Pro cannot deploy ReFS since 1709 I believe.
They have shifted, for whatever reason, from developing ReFS as a potential successor to NTFS to basically going “yeah, this is a niche thing for Enterprise use and most resiliency features are working only with Storage Spaces”. I think they are just not willing to pour resources into switching the entire OS to using something other than what it’s already built around. They could, obviously, APFS is a testament to it being doable, but I suppose in their view NTFS is “good enough”, if somewhat flawed. Maybe the next time they will actually massively update the core, NT6 style. Whenever that happens.
Posted on Reply
#47
Selaya
user556NTFS is over 30 years old too. Old doesn't mean obsolete.
but ntfs has been obsolete for at least like, 25 years
just bc macroshit keeps using it doesnt mean it's not obsolete
Posted on Reply
#48
DaemonForce
Frank_100Microsoft is still using FAT32.

100MB first or second partition of your C drive.
It's 32MB and I specifically formatted FAT16. There is NO reason it needs more. Jury is still out on MFT but as long as it doesn't travel it's fine.
Onasi“yeah, this is a niche thing for Enterprise use and most resiliency features are working only with Storage Spaces”
Storage Spaces doesn't really work all that well on my equipment and I always have a pretty fair mix of consumer and enterprise. I've lost some stuff by going to Storage Spaces. Just setup a SAS RAID and it's good.
Posted on Reply
#49
user556
RJARRRPCGPApparently, it will pretty much be as free as the usual Nvidia driver package, where a lot of Linux distro developers will frown, because the patent hasn't expired and/or a license restriction.
For Linux, ExFAT is fully open source already. It's completely in the upstream Linux kernel sources, covered by GPLv2.
Posted on Reply
#50
_roman_
uefi.org/specs/UEFI/2.10/13_Protocols_Media_Access.html
EFI encompasses the use of FAT32 for a system partition, and FAT12 or FAT16 for removable media. The FAT32 system partition is identified by an OSType value other than that used to identify previous versions of FAT. This unique partition type distinguishes an EFI defined file system from a normal FAT file system. The file system supported by EFI includes support for long file names.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
Nov 25th, 2024 23:33 EST change timezone

Latest GPU Drivers

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts