XP install on a network

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.newusers (More info?)

"Patty" <patty15NOSPAM@softhome.net> wrote in message
news:c60k2k02ams@enews3.newsguy.com...
> I am planning on installing XP-Pro on a new computer I'm in the process of
> building. I currently have a wired network with one Windows 98SE computer
> and one Windows ME computer. If I want to network everyone together so
that
> they can all see and access info on each other, is it true that I should
use
> FAT32 for the XP computer? I had read somewhere that the non-NTFS
computers
> would not be able to see files on the NTFS one but, the NTFS computer
would
> be able to see the files on the others. Is this accurate? Thanks.
>
> Patty
>
>

Not true - that only holds for local partitions. Over a network you can use
any formatting you like.

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.newusers (More info?)

I just want to be sure about this, I don't want to have to install XP twice.
According to Mark Minasi in Mastering Windows XP Professional 2nd edition,
he speaks of dual booting and says that on the same machine, XP formatted
with NTFS can access the FAT32 files, but the system using FAT32 cannot
access the NTSF files. This makes sense to me, but he goes on to say (and I
am quoting here) "The same is true of a network. If one machine uses NTFS
and another uses FAT or FAT32, the NTFS machine will be able to access FAT
and FAT32 files, but the FAT and FAT32 machine will not be able to access
the files on the NTSF machine." So is he wrong here, or am I not
understanding something? I need to be able to access files on all the
machines, or at least transfer information back and forth. I couldn't find
anything on microsoft's xp support page to clarify this. Thanks.

Patty

"Gordon" <me6@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:euefmXhJEHA.2456@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>
> Not true - that only holds for local partitions. Over a network you can
use
> any formatting you like.
>
>

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.newusers (More info?)

Patty:
I hate to say this about my hero, but Mark Minasi is dead wrong. Over the
wire, there is no such concept as disk "format". How do you think
businesses are able to create networks with Novell-formatted severs,
Linux-formatted servers, Windows-formatted servers, Windows-formatted
Workstations, and MAC-formatted Workstations, all sharing data accross the
wire?

Mark is usually right on, but he must have written that line in the
dentist's chair while breathing laughing gas.

steve


"Patty" <patty15NOSPAM@softhome.net> wrote in message
news:c610kr01emg@enews2.newsguy.com...
> I just want to be sure about this, I don't want to have to install XP
twice.
> According to Mark Minasi in Mastering Windows XP Professional 2nd edition,
> he speaks of dual booting and says that on the same machine, XP formatted
> with NTFS can access the FAT32 files, but the system using FAT32 cannot
> access the NTSF files. This makes sense to me, but he goes on to say (and
I
> am quoting here) "The same is true of a network. If one machine uses NTFS
> and another uses FAT or FAT32, the NTFS machine will be able to access FAT
> and FAT32 files, but the FAT and FAT32 machine will not be able to access
> the files on the NTSF machine." So is he wrong here, or am I not
> understanding something? I need to be able to access files on all the
> machines, or at least transfer information back and forth. I couldn't
find
> anything on microsoft's xp support page to clarify this. Thanks.
>
> Patty
>
> "Gordon" <me6@privacy.net> wrote in message
> news:euefmXhJEHA.2456@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> >
> > Not true - that only holds for local partitions. Over a network you can
> use
> > any formatting you like.
> >
> >
>
>

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.newusers (More info?)

"Patty" <patty15NOSPAM@softhome.net> wrote in message news:c610kr01emg@enews2.newsguy.com...
This makes sense to me, but he goes on to say (and I
> am quoting here) "The same is true of a network. If one machine uses NTFS
> and another uses FAT or FAT32, the NTFS machine will be able to access FAT
> and FAT32 files, but the FAT and FAT32 machine will not be able to access
> the files on the NTSF machine." So is he wrong here, or am I not

This guy is dead wrong, filing systems pertain to one local machine in that case, but shares across network can see "all" files and the filing system has nothing to do with it. Keep in mind, there are no such things (so to speak) as FAT32 files (or NTFS for that matter). FAT and NTFS are simply filing systems for storage on a drive.

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.newusers (More info?)

"Patty" <patty15NOSPAM@softhome.net> wrote in message
news:c610kr01emg@enews2.newsguy.com...
> I just want to be sure about this, I don't want to have to install XP
twice.
> According to Mark Minasi in Mastering Windows XP Professional 2nd edition,
> he speaks of dual booting and says that on the same machine, XP formatted
> with NTFS can access the FAT32 files, but the system using FAT32 cannot
> access the NTSF files. This makes sense to me, but he goes on to say (and
I
> am quoting here) "The same is true of a network. If one machine uses NTFS
> and another uses FAT or FAT32, the NTFS machine will be able to access FAT
> and FAT32 files, but the FAT and FAT32 machine will not be able to access
> the files on the NTSF machine."

AFAIK that is wrong.


So is he wrong here, or am I not
> understanding something? I need to be able to access files on all the
> machines, or at least transfer information back and forth. I couldn't
find
> anything on microsoft's xp support page to clarify this. Thanks.
>
> Patty
>
> "Gordon" <me6@privacy.net> wrote in message
> news:euefmXhJEHA.2456@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> >
> > Not true - that only holds for local partitions. Over a network you can
> use
> > any formatting you like.
> >
> >
>
>

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.newusers (More info?)

"Patty" <patty15NOSPAM@softhome.net> wrote in message
news:c610kr01emg@enews2.newsguy.com...
> I just want to be sure about this, I don't want to have to install XP
twice.
> According to Mark Minasi in Mastering Windows XP Professional 2nd edition,
> he speaks of dual booting and says that on the same machine, XP formatted
> with NTFS can access the FAT32 files, but the system using FAT32 cannot
> access the NTSF files. This makes sense to me, but he goes on to say (and
I
> am quoting here) "The same is true of a network. If one machine uses NTFS
> and another uses FAT or FAT32, the NTFS machine will be able to access FAT
> and FAT32 files, but the FAT and FAT32 machine will not be able to access
> the files on the NTSF machine."


In addition - how does he get over Windows 98 machines joining an NT Domain
then?

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.newusers (More info?)

Thank you everyone for your replies. I just wanted to be sure before I used
NTFS (is that the best way to go for XP?) and then found out my 98SE and ME
computers on the network couldn't see the files I need to share.

Patty

"Tom" <noway@nothere.com> wrote in message
news 2VR0jjJEHA.800@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...

"Patty" <patty15NOSPAM@softhome.net> wrote in message
news:c610kr01emg@enews2.newsguy.com...
This makes sense to me, but he goes on to say (and I
> am quoting here) "The same is true of a network. If one machine uses NTFS
> and another uses FAT or FAT32, the NTFS machine will be able to access FAT
> and FAT32 files, but the FAT and FAT32 machine will not be able to access
> the files on the NTSF machine." So is he wrong here, or am I not

This guy is dead wrong, filing systems pertain to one local machine in that
case, but shares across network can see "all" files and the filing system
has nothing to do with it. Keep in mind, there are no such things (so to
speak) as FAT32 files (or NTFS for that matter). FAT and NTFS are simply
filing systems for storage on a drive.

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.newusers (More info?)

Greetings --

The file systems on the various computers communicating over a
network are completely irrelevant, as none of the individual
computers' operating systems ever directly access the other computers'
hard drives. Instead, a computer sends a "request," if you will, for
the desired data, and the operating system of the host ("receiving")
computer accesses its own hard drive (whose file system it obviously
can read) and then sends that data back to the requesting computer as
neutral packets of information that are completely independent of the
file systems on the respective computers. After all, don't you use a
Windows-based PC (whether it's FAT32 or NTFS) to access data stored on
the Internet's mostly Unix servers, which use a completely different
file system?


Bruce Chambers

--
Help us help you:
http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html


You can have peace. Or you can have freedom. Don't ever count on
having both at once. -- RAH


"Patty" <patty15NOSPAM@softhome.net> wrote in message
news:c60k2k02ams@enews3.newsguy.com...
>I am planning on installing XP-Pro on a new computer I'm in the
>process of
> building. I currently have a wired network with one Windows 98SE
> computer
> and one Windows ME computer. If I want to network everyone together
> so that
> they can all see and access info on each other, is it true that I
> should use
> FAT32 for the XP computer? I had read somewhere that the non-NTFS
> computers
> would not be able to see files on the NTFS one but, the NTFS
> computer would
> be able to see the files on the others. Is this accurate? Thanks.
>
> Patty
>
>

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.newusers (More info?)

Greetings --

Based on what you've quoted, I'd suggest throwing that book away -
there's no telling what other nonsense is included.

Bruce Chambers

--
Help us help you:
http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html


You can have peace. Or you can have freedom. Don't ever count on
having both at once. -- RAH


"Patty" <patty15NOSPAM@softhome.net> wrote in message
news:c610kr01emg@enews2.newsguy.com...

Snipped

> but he goes on to say (and I
> am quoting here) "The same is true of a network. If one machine
> uses NTFS
> and another uses FAT or FAT32, the NTFS machine will be able to
> access FAT
> and FAT32 files, but the FAT and FAT32 machine will not be able to
> access
> the files on the NTSF machine." So is he wrong here, or am I not
> understanding something? I need to be able to access files on all
> the
> machines, or at least transfer information back and forth. I
> couldn't find
> anything on microsoft's xp support page to clarify this. Thanks.
>
> Patty
>

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.newusers (More info?)

Patty wrote:
> I just want to be sure about this, I don't want to have to install XP
> twice. According to Mark Minasi in Mastering Windows XP Professional
> 2nd edition, he speaks of dual booting and says that on the same
> machine, XP formatted with NTFS can access the FAT32 files, but the
> system using FAT32 cannot access the NTSF files. This makes sense to
> me, but he goes on to say (and I am quoting here) "The same is true
> of a network. If one machine uses NTFS and another uses FAT or
> FAT32, the NTFS machine will be able to access FAT and FAT32 files,
> but the FAT and FAT32 machine will not be able to access the files on
> the NTSF machine." So is he wrong here, or am I not understanding
> something? I need to be able to access files on all the machines, or
> at least transfer information back and forth. I couldn't find
> anything on microsoft's xp support page to clarify this. Thanks.
>
> Patty

Mark Minasi needs to find another job if he's going to persist in writing
such unadulterated rubbish! That is categorically *NOT* true. The file
format only affects the drive, not the files.

Think about it for a moment. I don't know what your job is, but if you work
for a medium sized business, as sure as eggs are eggs you have a server
running a server OS (most commonly Windows 2000 Server or 2003 Server). The
hard drive(s) in that server *will*, I can guarantee it, be formatted NTFS.
Now, imagine your company is a little strapped for cash, after upgrading the
server, and the terminals are still running Windows 98 which, obviously,
cannot read NTFS. Now, it would be a dilly of a pickle (I suffer from the
same form of Tourette's as Ned Flanders :-D) if those terminals couldn't
read the applications installed on the network drive wouldn't it?

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.newusers (More info?)

Actually they are strapped for cash and they run an NT server with win 98SE
and WinXP Pro workstations. ;o) It all seems to work well.

Patty

"Cerridwen" <cerridwen@celticnet.com> wrote in message
news:40858dac_1@127.0.0.1...
> Mark Minasi needs to find another job if he's going to persist in writing
> such unadulterated rubbish! That is categorically *NOT* true. The file
> format only affects the drive, not the files.
>
> Think about it for a moment. I don't know what your job is, but if you
work
> for a medium sized business, as sure as eggs are eggs you have a server
> running a server OS (most commonly Windows 2000 Server or 2003 Server).
The
> hard drive(s) in that server *will*, I can guarantee it, be formatted
NTFS.
> Now, imagine your company is a little strapped for cash, after upgrading
the
> server, and the terminals are still running Windows 98 which, obviously,
> cannot read NTFS. Now, it would be a dilly of a pickle (I suffer from the
> same form of Tourette's as Ned Flanders :-D) if those terminals couldn't
> read the applications installed on the network drive wouldn't it?
>
>

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.newusers (More info?)

Well, I'm just very glad to hear it. I guess I always knew that there were
Unix servers and NT servers and I know that you don't have to have those
operating systems on the workstations. I just read that information in the
book and just wanted to be clear before I set this new computer up. Thanks
so much.

Patty

"Bruce Chambers" <bchambers@nospamcableone.net> wrote in message
news:108bkqpn5vthdc8@corp.supernews.com...
> Greetings --
>
> Based on what you've quoted, I'd suggest throwing that book away -
> there's no telling what other nonsense is included.
>
> Bruce Chambers
>
> --
> Help us help you:
> http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
> http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
>
>
> You can have peace. Or you can have freedom. Don't ever count on
> having both at once. -- RAH
>
>