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

[Steevo]

Is this a rhetorical question or a legitimate one? Given, even NTFS's file hierarchy and ownership system isn't exactly the most advanced or secure thing in the world. FAT simply has no security whatsoever.

Booting up "live cd" on a computer containing a NTFS drive allowed deletion and or copy/access of whatever file and you could totally ignore everything unless it was encrypted. Even reading the Metadata table to recover deleted files was easy.

But still lightyears ahead of FAT disk.

I asked why does it matter what FS you need to update firmware? There's no technical limitation as such, except on old(er) machines. The reason multiple FS is not supported is probably more down to $$$ than anything else!


Secure is "relative" in the context of BIOS updates, if you have local/physical access FS should be the last of your worries!

It matters as newer drives aren't getting smaller, and if we reach a limit in the future a lot of non-power users won't be able to create an update tool.

You can manually change a partition size and bypass the limit but would Windows let a batch file like that run since it could also destroy volumes if pointed at the wrong drive?

 

[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.

 

[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.

 

[R0H1T]

the regular Windows 10/11 Pro cannot deploy ReFS since 1709 I believe

Forced segmentation/upsell or something?

 

[Dr. Dro]

Forced 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

 

[chrcoluk]

I think its segmentation, the same reason applocker isnt routinely deployed on consumer machines.

 

[Chaitanya]

ExFAT 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.

 

[R0H1T]

ExFAT 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.

exFAT License

The hidden cost of “free” exFAT for Linux and why an external licensed driver is essential. Q&A from Paragon Software Late August 2019 Microsoft made exFAT specifications available to the general public and announced the eventual inclusion of exFAT…

www.paragon-software.com

 

[TheinsanegamerN]

The 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.

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

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.

 

[Wirko]

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

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.)

 

[matar]

Finaly . Came too too late but better then never...

 

[Solaris17]

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.

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.

 

[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)

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.

 

[csendesmark]

Why?
We have exFAT...

 

[RJARRRPCGP]

Why?
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.

 

[user556]

NTFS is over 30 years old too. Old doesn't mean obsolete.

 

[RJARRRPCGP]

NTFS 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!

 

[user556]

exFAT License

The hidden cost of “free” exFAT for Linux and why an external licensed driver is essential. Q&A from Paragon Software Late August 2019 Microsoft made exFAT specifications available to the general public and announced the eventual inclusion of exFAT…

www.paragon-software.com

Okay, looks like that is Linux only for the time being. Patents expire in 2027.

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!

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.

 

[RJARRRPCGP]

So 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.

 

[mechtech]

yep.............

 

[Frank_100]

FAT32 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.

 

[Onasi]

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.

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.

 

[Selaya]

NTFS 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

 

[DaemonForce]

Microsoft 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.

“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.

 

[user556]

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.

For Linux, ExFAT is fully open source already. It's completely in the upstream Linux kernel sources, covered by GPLv2.