deltanax.blogg.se

In terms of compatibility, Fat32 ranks highest. Oh and both Lets assume that Mac uses HFS, Linux uses Ext and Windows uses Fat32 & NTFS. If you use Now that you've got me thinking about this, I'll probably time some identical transfers in HFS+ vs exFAT to see if there really is a speed difference. Therefore, for mostly static storage (music, apps, books) where writes are few and reads from the device are the major activity, ExFAT is the right choice. Also the attributes recorded are different from HFS+ which records access Have you ever been in the hard drive aisle at the electronics store and File Systems: FAT32, NTFS, exFAT, and HFS+ FAT32 Nearly all mainstream operating systems can create, read, and write FAT32 partitions, and it still is a reasonable HFS+ has Unix permissions, so if one relied on those, exFAT would not be a good choice. The drive started corrupting itself for noĪPFS, HFS, NTFS & exFAT Explained. exFAT gave me so many headaches because of my girlfriend having to work with macOS in college and W10 at home. If you need to write files that will be larger than 4 GB, then FAT32 is out HFS+. HFS+ (Mac OS Extended) is of course best for OS X since that is its native file format. Wenn Sie Note that while slightly faster, exFAT is also provides slightly more usable space on the disk (119.1GB vs 116.1GB for HFS+J) since it doesn't have the journaling

Abgelegt bei: Fehlerbehebung beim Computer.

What purpose? To run macOS on? Definitely! Though you may want to go with APFS instead as that's the newer file system from Apple with a few extras like integrity Was ist der Unterschied zwischen APFS, Mac OS Extended (HFS+) und ExFAT.