MSTS VS XP file systems

phill70 · Post by **phill70** » Wed Dec 18, 2002 11:59 pm

Is MSTS more stable under the Windows XP NTFS5 filing system, than under the 32 bit one ?

asalmon · Post by **asalmon** » Thu Dec 19, 2002 12:45 am

Dunno about msts in particular, but in general NTFS is a much better file system than FAT in my opinion.

I have sometimes crashed XP, each time I reboot there is no scandisk, or if there is no major problem. (ntfs)

I managed to crash a friend's that was on FAT, and the resulting scandisk found all sorts of corruption! Even a couple of cross-linked files.

-Alan

danielwilkieuk · Post by **danielwilkieuk** » Thu Dec 19, 2002 4:46 pm

There is no scan disk but there is a check disk utitlity which can be run from the command promt. Type Chkdsk at command promt to run it. Worth doing if your XP crashes a lot.

Ive found XP to be one of the most stable O/S out there. Even crashes less than Linux Mandrake i had running for a while. When XP does crash it seems to be either another peice of software or drivers which crash it.

I through bricks at mine and it still wont crash

asalmon · Post by **asalmon** » Thu Dec 19, 2002 6:12 pm

Yep, I meant chkdsk. I do run this about once a week - it rarely finds anthing wrong.

MartinH · Post by **MartinH** » Thu Dec 19, 2002 7:08 pm

I'm still running on Win 98 at the moment so don't have first hand experience of XP. However, I am about to change over and when I discussed this with a friend he told me NOT to put it on FAT 32. He was adamant about this and repeated it several times (I'm a bit thick when it comes to computers

)

Martin

danielwilkieuk · Post by **danielwilkieuk** » Thu Dec 19, 2002 8:06 pm

Fat32 for XP is a waste of time. NTSF is much more
robust.

And it will be usefull to have NTFS for when you get that DVD writer from Santa as Fat32 cant burn DVDs more than 2GBs due to size limits. NTFS is the only way to do it

snowcrashandy · Post by **snowcrashandy** » Thu Dec 19, 2002 9:21 pm

danielwilkieuk wrote:Fat32 for XP is a waste of time. NTSF is much more
robust.

My XP/NTFS system rarely crashes, and trainsim is one of the progs that makes it crash rarely, chkdisk never finds any errors post crash.

XP's well worth it.

Andy.

saddletank · Post by **saddletank** » Fri Dec 20, 2002 9:31 am

danielwilkieuk wrote:Fat32 for XP is a waste of time.

Oh? No problems here. I also find XP very stable, much more so than 98. About the only thing it hates are my digital camera card reader drivers, and as its an obscure reader I'm having trouble finding ones XP likes.

Dspring · Post by **Dspring** » Fri Dec 20, 2002 1:41 pm

I started with MSTS on Win98 / FAT32 pc, now on XP / NTFS pc. Don't think I've ever had a problem due to MSTS files in either set up, and it's hard to compare between the two pc's because the XP one has much faster cpu / graphics card. However I cannot think of a good reason not to use NTFS under XP. In fact you must use it under XP if you want to use some of the more advanced file management and security features.
If you have already chosen FAT 16 or 32 and decide you'd rather have NTFS there is an easy conversion, on a Command Prompt window
Convert (drive name e.g.C:) /fs ntfst
Conversion will not lose your data.

Don't worry about the file system, go with NTFS, so far as MSTS is concerned it just works!

kevarc · Post by **kevarc** » Fri Dec 20, 2002 2:31 pm

XP is the most stable OS that Windows has come out with. For those of us who have been around since Win2.0/3.0 and DOS 3.0, MS has come a long way. It is nice to say goodby to the BSOD. Use the NTSF system that came with XP, that is why they included it. You wll find the FAT32 will drag you down.

The thing that MS has consistently NOT made better are the Tools. I still prefer to use Norton Utilities for defrag and the like. It does a much more complete job than the Window's tools.

saddletank · Post by **saddletank** » Fri Dec 20, 2002 2:33 pm

Dspring wrote:If you have already chosen FAT 16 or 32 and decide you'd rather have NTFS there is an easy conversion, on a Command Prompt window
Convert (drive name e.g.C:) /fs ntfst
Conversion will not lose your data.

OK, sounds disarmingly simple. Is it really as simple as that? May give it a go if it is (I'm no computer geek).

esswe · Post by **esswe** » Fri Dec 20, 2002 8:25 pm

saddletank wrote:
Dspring wrote:If you have already chosen FAT 16 or 32 and decide you'd rather have NTFS there is an easy conversion, on a Command Prompt window
Convert (drive name e.g.C:) /fs ntfst
Conversion will not lose your data.
OK, sounds disarmingly simple. Is it really as simple as that? May give it a go if it is (I'm no computer geek).

The correct syntax is

convert c: /fs:ntfs

Replace "c:" with the drive letter of the FAT* drive that you want to convert. And remember that once you've converted a drive to NTFS there's no turning back. You can't convert it back to FAT* (as if anyone would ever want to do that) unless you buy special third party software (Partition Magic).

Edit: a spelling error. Caused by my fingers stumbling on the keys. Which in turn was caused by the empty pint glass on my desk next to the keyboard. So friends, make you sure you have no empty glasses, they cause spelling errors.... <hicc>

phill70 · Post by **phill70** » Fri Dec 20, 2002 10:23 pm

just done it, seems fine. thanks everyone.

BobbyH · Post by **BobbyH** » Sun Dec 22, 2002 8:49 pm

Train Simulator ran reasonably well under Windows 98SE, then I upgraded to a new and higher specification computer, and use Windows XP. TS graphics are much more defined, but locomotives run on routes much slower and choppy, and brakes less responsive.
No one seem to be able to rectify errors, and allow me to enjoy my train sessions. Start has an error "Video not found VIDS - MP42 compressor", giving a white screen with black diagonal lines. Under Windows 98SE, you changed a line in System.ini, and this cured this error. According to what I read, I must be the only person to have a "choppy" screen movement.

asalmon · Post by **asalmon** » Sun Dec 22, 2002 9:18 pm

That error message is just the startup video - you're not missing much!

Atomic Systems

MSTS VS XP file systems

MSTS VS XP file systems

FAT32 vs NTFS

Re: FAT32 vs NTFS

Re: FAT32 vs NTFS