re: Cluster size survey, check your computer now!
Monday, July 12, 2004 at 11:05 am
Windows Me Annoyances Discussion Forum
Posted by Cam
(4178 messages posted)
Free MS Update CD
No Phil, A:\>format c: /Z:8 , gives a 4k cluster , and A:\>format c: /Z:16 , gives
an 8k cluster.
You would have to use: A:\>format c: /Z:32 to get a 16k cluster.
This is because it is binary.
Remember that you can dual boot '98 and ME with 2000 & XP which would format to 4096
byte clusters anyway, if they were using NTFS.
Mac
WINDOWS HELP RAM
On Monday, July 12, 2004 at 8:38 am, WhitPhil wrote:
"You would think that Microsoft would make ... this ... knowledge ... more ... publicly
known."
What knowledge? The cluster sizes that should be used (for the majority of users)
are the ones that are defaults when you format an empty partition.
>>> No, the information contained in the MSKB Article.
So what happens when you use a Partition Resizer that changes the size from under
8 Gb to over 8 Gb? (You get 4096 byte clusters on a 13·2 Gb drive, as I did.)
"Then people could use: Format x: /Z:16 , and possibly get a better overall result
when using FAT32."
???? 16K? I thought you were advocating 4K for everything?
"Nor am I attempting to correlate but just compare."
But, it's like comparing apples and peanuts, with no useful result.
>>> Take a look at PCQ&A
"Probably a function of RAM and processor"
I have seen posts from people with 512K boxes that were getting this error. Once
they corrected the cluster size, all was well again.
>>> Please see dual booting.
|
All messages in this thread [show all]
 |  | | | | |  | re: Cluster size survey, check your computer now! (Cam: Mon, Jul 12, 2004, 11:05 am) |
| |
| |
Return to the Windows Me Discussion Forum
|
|
