When will Windows get rid of this obsolete filesystem?

No checksums for files only metadata, so it's not really something an enterprise that uses btfs, zfs, or even refs would use.

i dont know how to :(

the same thing that is wrong with windows

I really like ext4, but i've never noticed a problem with ntfs when I use it with windows. I wish the performance with linux was better. my external ntfs drives are slow with linux.

What's wrong with NTFS?

ntfs is best fs

it's not obsolete, internally it has changed significantly over the decade.

This.
NTFS is the only FS I've ever used that I've had to go out of my way to destroy.
Everything else has a self-destruct button somewhere, waiting for you to trip over it, and BOOM.

>the same thing that is wrong with windows
It's works and is successful?
Not a good reason to hate something.
Unless you're an Ausfag maybe.

lel it hasn't changed much since xp

It hasn't actually. Last time there was on-disk format change was Windows 2000.
It's a testament to how well-developed NTFS is - all the subsequent features (TxF, symlinks, etc.) are implemented as (userspace, no less) DLLs.

>the same thing that is wrong with windows
so nothing?

It honestly is the worse part of windows, the reason why ssds are considered nessery is squarely on m$ shit filesystem

Nu-Jow Forums everyone.

Attached: kermit-suicide.gif (320x320, 1.9M)

The fact that NTFS worked fine for 20 years before SSDs were invented suggests you're just ass-pulling, user.

>NTFS BAD
Why?
>randomly choose most illogical, impossible bullshit
This is why people laugh at you, user.

Attached: 1544838476602.jpg (1015x1119, 609K)

nah. ssd's, like all block devices, just abstract the physical media to the point that any basic structured filesystem should be reasonably performant.

I mean, you'd have to go out of your way to reverse the voodoo firmware FTL garbage to really make something like an SSD crawl for IO operations.

Not to mention, out of every 10 SSDs, 9 have NTFS on them.
I'd be very surprised if the firmware isn't optimised for this case - they do it for FAT32 on UFDs for example.

NSA backdoor.

See .

Nothing, it's just the usual freetard sour grapes. They don't understand it, they can't have it, so it ebil.

fpbp

It's not obsolete. It has been updated behind the scenes in each major Windows release, it has features LoonX can only dream of and fragmentation is no longer a problem since SSDs and background defragmentation.

That's because the Linux NTFS driver (NTFS-3g) was written by the company Tuxera to be gimped by design to make their proprietary NTFS driver sell better.

So just pirate that if you want better performance.
#Free_Software

>people unironically defending NTFS in this thread
Enjoy defragging your hard drives

*uses a ssd*

Very soon. REEEEEEEEfs is coming.

As a filesystems expert, let me be one of the cacaphony of voices saying FUCK NTFS. Ancient bullshit, doesn't even have proper permissions. ZFS is my favourite, but ext4 works great too. But Microsoft is too stuck in the mud due to backwards compatibility to truly innovate

>it’s obsolete because it was around before I was born

holy shit zoomers...

What are you talking about? NTFS supports ACLs.

>"It just works. No corrupted data in decades for me. Better than using trash like ext which corrupts your data randomly."
>ntfs
>"it just works"
>"Better than using trash like ext which corrupts your data randomly."
>"ext which corrupts your data randomly"
>not ntfs
>but ext

Attached: 1565872174536.png (580x849, 422K)

Well, they've already put ReFS in consumer versions of Windows. It's available already, it's just a matter of time until it replaces NTFS as the default.

Go eat toe dirt Stallman.

We only need to defrag because our drives are full of playable media and professional software.
Things you'd know absolutely nothing about, of course.

>As a filesystems expert
>says things eight year-olds know is completely wrong
Don't ever change, Jow Forums.

>ReFS in consumer versions of Windows
They took it out of home and pro...

Read and write, but not format.
This is your friend: github.com/0xbadfca11/mkrefs

Upgrade to Pro for Workstations (guide somewhere in /fwt/) and it's back.

>run 1 TB NTFS drive near full for a few months
>fragmentation: 60%
>defrag, time remaining: more than 1 week
>give up, copy everything to NAS, format, copy it back

>run 2 TB ext4 drive near full for a couple years
>fragmentation: 0.2%
>shrug and go do something else

Or drop by MDL and install the ReFS packages.

Never had any issues using it in all the years.
What is your problem with ntfs?

The real question is why does Microsoft hate ext so much?

>run 1 TB NTFS drive near full for a few months
>constantly reading and writing files
FTFY, you're welcome.
>fragmentation: 60%

>run 2 TB ext4 drive near full for a couple years
>writing nothing, because what is there to write?
FTFY, you're welcome.
>fragmentation: 0.2%

Attached: 2a0.jpg (760x739, 112K)

You have to understand, it's not a conspiracy against you, it's just that nobody important gives a shit.
If you're a nobody, there's third-party ext readers out there.

NTFS drive was primarily media files.
ext4 drive had a bunch of hourly logs being written and deleted automatically.
Better luck next time.

This is a lie, but OK.

>big files fragment more than smol files
>omg the drive with big files is more fragged
>this is ntfs's fault

Attached: 1559911040238.jpg (573x572, 127K)

I didn't know about those, thanks.

>nonfree
Disgusting

>ITT: Freetards who know nothing about filesystems invent shit to dump on an FS that they can't even use - but is used by billions of real people every day without the slightest problem.

Attached: sour-grapes.jpg (1200x1000, 128K)

loonixtards are known for having issues.

Having issues is one thing.
Launching ridiculous holy wars on the basis of the contents of LICENSE.TXT is quite another.
I miss the days when we used to round up, chain and flog crazy people.
*sip*

Yeah, dunno why this sort of thing isn't in the /fwt/ paste, along with how to install Store on LTSC and other FAQs.

See .

Not him, but my 4 TB ext4 drive that is in daily use since 2016 and is filled about 93 % with big files has a fragmentation rate of 1.1 %. NTFS is a truly shitty filesystem that fragments absolutely everything. There's a reason Microsoft has a permanent defrag service running since Windows 10.

>pooinloos
Doesn't that just mean anyone who uses a toilet?

Literally everything you said is wrong.

>There's a reason Microsoft has a permanent defrag service running since Windows 10

Attached: 1544826348196.jpg (800x450, 45K)

yeah, the freetards are right. windows 10 is unusable in a standard hdd without constantly defragging.
no u

i know, i wrote

>yeah, the freetards are right

Attached: 1477500690651.jpg (151x233, 11K)

>windows 10 is unusable in a standard hdd without constantly defragging

Attached: bag o' bait.jpg (1026x534, 189K)

>unironically using an OS where links are implemented as special .lnk files because actual transparent links have to be restricted to administrators

it's just the truth dude. i'm on win10 but i had to buy an ssd because it got slow as shit and constantly maxed at 100%.

Microsoft sock puppets hard at work defending their master's shitty fragmenting file system.
I hope you get paid well.

>unironically being stupid enough to not understand that hardlinks don't work on fat
>unironically being stupid enough to parrot a limitation that was removed 15 years ago

Nah, we just can't stand fucking liars like you.

Why are you freetards whining about fragmentation?
Are you so poor you can't afford an SSD?
Don't bother responding, we know the answer.

Nobody except you is talking about FAT, you fucking retard.

loonix freetard hard at work to defend a shitty file system that no one uses but other retards on the free ride.
I hope you get paid nothing for your bad job.

Yes you are, you just don't know it, because you're an absolute mong.
Let me spell it out for your microbrain: did Windows 95 (when .lnk files came along) support anything other than FAT?

NTFS is shit in a lot of ways, but is right -- it doesn't break that badly.
haven't had an EXT3 or EXT4 disk get mangled either though

FUCK HFS
FUCK APFS
FUCK exFAT (seriously, for a file system designed for removable devices, it sure as fuck lacks redundancy and recoverability features even though you can totally expect the drive to get unplugged at any time, whether on accident or on purpose)

Attached: 57504724_10213997009419683_7441063941632950272_o.jpg (720x1280, 51K)

How is that relevant to Windows 7 and 10 running on NTFS drives?

aw you really tried there didn't you? don't feel bad, here's a (you).

I keep forgetting - freetards don't understand what backcompat is.

>FUCK HFS
>FUCK APFS
What is journaled?

The filesystem arena is a patent minefield.

The average user doesn't need the advanced features of newer and more exotic filesystems.

SSDs do eventually suffer when heavily fragmented. Lots of tiny nonsequential reads are still significantly slower than a few big linear ones.

>backwards compatibility to a system that won't even be able to read your hard disk
you just went full retard, nigga

>FUCK HFS
Yeah, but it's ancient. It's the FAT of the Apple world. HFS+ seems to do all right despite all its bolted-on features though.
>FUCK APFS
Why? Nobody seems too worried about it. Is it the lack of third-party tooling the issue?
>FUCK exFAT
WorksForMe(TM) in it's little niche. Think of it as FAT64, and treat it as such.

>knocking backcompat
Into the trash you go with the other 1%.

Forgot to mention, Windows 7 and upwards aren't backwards compatible to Windows 95 software since a bunch of libraries were removed, especially true DOS mode.

For long term data that just sits (your server data for example) that must remain error free and intact;

ZFS

For your desktop or netbook computer which you use only maybe a few hours a day then turn off;

NTFS

It has sub-par protection against long-term bitrot and data corruption.

NTFS performance is lacking in the face of newer filesystems (it is really bad at managing a large number of files). It is a relic of its era.

You know, they could support legacy .lnk files AND use proper symlinks on new things. They could even write a bit of code that creates a .lnk file transparently when moving a symlink to a FAT drive, and creates a symlink when anything writes a .lnk to a NTFS drive. But they don't.

Backcompat is nice, but it doesn't need to be done in the most ass-backward retarded way possible.

Rearranging the entire userspace every two years is a freetard thing. Successful desktop OSs don't do that shit.

zfs > btrfs > ext4 > xfs > ntfs > hfs/apfs > poopoopeepee > fat/exfat

When a reason exists other than nerd-fashion and edge cases nobody gives a shit about.

>Backcompat is nice, but it doesn't need to be done in the most ass-backward retarded way possible.
It is Microsoft we're talking about. They always do it like that.

I dunno I can play a lot of Win 95 era games on my Windows 7 x64 computer just fine.