FAT+ or exFAT?

FAT+ or exFAT?
	Post Reply		Forum

Posted by: Laaca
01/11/2009, 13:35:16

Microsoft in 2006 specified the new filesystem which is very similar to normal FAT but supports huge disks and files.
It would be much better to support this than FAT+ because it is supported by somebody else too and not only EDR-DOS

Related link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ExFAT

Post Reply

View All

Followups

Re: FAT+ or exFAT? --- Udo Kuhnt ( 01/11/2009, 15:29:50 ) ( 863 bytes ) +1
- Re: FAT+ vs. exFAT --- lucho ( 01/11/2009, 15:38:15 ) ( 254 bytes )
Re: exFAT --- lucho ( 01/11/2009, 15:34:35 ) ( 70 bytes ) +2
- Re: exFAT --- Laaca ( 02/14/2009, 13:19:30 ) ( 286 bytes ) +1
  - Re: exFAT = ex-FAT = former FAT --- lucho ( 02/14/2009, 14:55:23 ) ( 513 bytes )
- Re: exFAT --- avoskov ( 03/16/2009, 19:17:22 ) ( 115 bytes ) +1
  - Re: exFAT (technical details) --- avoskov ( 03/16/2009, 19:28:37 ) ( 953 bytes ) link +1
    - Re: exFAT (technical details) --- overcertified ( 01/06/2010, 00:09:52 ) ( 91 bytes ) +1
      - Re: exFAT (technical details) Even more --- overcertified ( 01/13/2010, 18:43:29 ) ( 31 bytes )
NTSC sucks | exFAT sucks --- DOS386 ( 01/12/2009, 13:11:54 ) ( 542 bytes ) +2
- Re: NTSC sucks | exFAT sucks --- Bret ( 01/06/2010, 16:50:50 ) ( 1087 bytes ) link +1
  - Re: NTSC sucks | exFAT sucks --- Udo Kuhnt ( 01/07/2010, 09:01:57 ) ( 653 bytes ) +1
    - Plz no FAT64 k thx --- cm ( 01/07/2010, 14:38:25 ) ( 996 bytes ) +1
      - Re: Plz no FAT64 k thx --- Bret ( 01/08/2010, 17:40:09 ) ( 865 bytes ) +1
        
        Re: Plz no FAT64 k thx --- Udo Kuhnt ( 01/08/2010, 18:22:25 ) ( 946 bytes ) +2
        
        Re: Plz no FAT64 k thx --- Laaca ( 03/21/2010, 15:31:37 ) ( 797 bytes )
        Re: Plz no FAT64 k thx --- avoskov ( 04/26/2010, 12:45:01 ) ( 488 bytes )
- Re: NTFS(not NTSC) sucks | exFAT sucks --- Roy ( 03/26/2010, 09:45:00 ) ( 237 bytes )

The DR-DOS/OpenDOS Enhancement Project