James Newtons Massmind wrote:

>> 1.    It's been suggested that after a system crash NTFS drives may be
>> reluctant to allow you to access them in a rebuilt system or if
>> transferred to another system.

Correct. NTFS has security mechanisms built into the file system that may
prevent you from accessing files, or from decrypting them. However, as
others have told you already, there are ways around this. (It's a bit more
complicated to read encrypted files on another system, but you don't have
to encrypt your files -- and if you do, you should be glad :)

> On the flip side, NTFS is extremely hardy with regard to hard drive
> damage, etc... 

I can second that. 10 years of NTFS on my workstations and small servers,
and I wouldn't exchange it for FAT (whatever flavor).

>> 2.    Data transfer rate to the NTFS drives across the network or
>> between NTFS and FAT32 drives is abysmal. Typically well under 1 MB /
>> second. Transfers between 2 x SIDE NTFS drives seems to be much faster.
>> Network is standard 10/100 UTP and works much faster for FAT32
>> transfers.
> 
> Our main network was, for years, NT servers on NTFS and Win '98 boxes on
> FAT32. I never saw any speed problems. On the other hand, we don't copy
> gobs of image files. 

I've never experienced any speed problem transferring between FAT32 and
NTFS, locally or over the network. If there is, I suggest that there's a
problem elsewhere. My shares of folders on NTFS drives go as fast as the
machine can go... It's been some time that I had a FAT32 share, but I can't
remember any difference.

Gerhard

-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist