Will Linux have to drop FAT support?

someguy · Posted: Thu Dec 11, 2003 7:45 am Post subject:

im going to build a distribution with the sole purpose of automatically destroying any windows based harddrive (quick format) just put the cd in and walk away *dang im evil*
_________________
print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<>
)]}\EsMsKsN0[lN*1lK[d2%Sa2/d0<X+d*lMLa^*lN%0]dsXx++lMlN/dsM0<J]dsJxp"|dc`
while [ 1 ] ; do echo "*" | telnet ip.of.print.er 9100 ; done

danbond_98 · n00b Joined: 23 Aug 2003 Posts: 8 Location: Exeter, UK

today it's mass storeage devices and embedded systems, tommorrow it could be PDA's or anything surely? ok so at the moment they are only looking at those two things, but i am sure if it serves their purposes they would apply it to other things, being they have the right to.

or am i missing something? i am not american and therefore not amazingly up on IP laws, mind you i am not amazingly up on UK IP laws which is not good seeing as one of my first year computer science modules last year was all about them.....

Doomwookie · Posted: Thu Dec 11, 2003 12:25 pm Post subject:

canislupus · n00b Joined: 15 Nov 2003 Posts: 8 Location: London

A lot of people on this forum have suggested that because the Linux driver is reverse engineered, it is not subject to this patent. There have been some posts correcting this idea, but I think it needs saying again, and louder:

A PATENT IS A LEGALIZED MONOPOLY ON AN IDEA

It does not matter how you implement that idea. If you implement it at all, you are subject to the patent. That is why people get so upset about patents. This is not at all the same as Copyright, which covers the specific implementation.

Now, as far as Microsoft's action being restricted to embedded devices goes, that is only because they have chosen not to apply it to other users of FAT. They could if they wanted to, though. They have a monopoly on that idea, remember, regardless of how or where it is used. I suspect that they wouldn't enforce it on Linux, however, because they'd probably run afoul of Anti Trust accusations, but that doesn't mean that the patent doesn't cover that.

Patents are bad. They are anti-competitive, and it has not been proven that they are effective in encouraging innovation, which is the justification that is most often put forward for them.

trbecker · Posted: Thu Dec 11, 2003 1:14 pm Post subject:

mmm... the only thing i'll lost is my shared mp3 partition, moved to a reiserfs partition. so, if i install winex and warcraft 3 under linux, my windowz box will serve just to play Counter Strike? m... and i'll gain a lot of space :twisted:

Evangelion · Posted: Thu Dec 11, 2003 2:37 pm Post subject:

Yen · Posted: Sun Dec 14, 2003 7:10 pm Post subject:

That's why i switched to Linux, I'm sick of this corporate world with patants, DRM, TCPA and stuff

We all know, MS doesn't want us to use FAT anymore, but something like the new WinFS that haves DRM by default.
The best FS by MS is NTFS and will stay NTFS for ever I think...

Well, people could use ext2 instead of FAT on their MP3 players and stuff....

StringCheesian · l33t Joined: 21 Oct 2003 Posts: 887

Someone on slashdot.org posted info that suggested the patent(s) only covers certain extentions to FAT, like long file names. In that case, regular FAT would still be OK. Which one do portable devices use (if FAT at all)?

Does it make a distinction between an impementation of the file system itself and an implementation of drivers for it? It seems only the former is applying in the case...

RemcoNL · Posted: Mon Dec 15, 2003 12:03 am Post subject:

So I'll have to find a way to upgrade my digital camera with EXT2 ?!
_________________
Use Compact Flash cards as a silent IDE hard drive

Clete2 · Posted: Mon Dec 15, 2003 12:41 am Post subject:

Bowyakka · Posted: Mon Dec 15, 2003 2:49 pm Post subject:

I have this sneaky supsion that that only applies to fat-32 vfat and miscrosoft versions of fat 12 and 16 I belive that what was once the developers of dr-dos and ibm have their own implmentations of the fs and that its a it a non official standard ....

bit i might be wrong (anyway the desgin stinks linked lists only allow for soo much in terms of storage and efficientcy anyway)
_________________
glows in the dark

Stormy Eyes · Posted: Mon Dec 15, 2003 3:18 pm Post subject: IANAL

Cossins · Posted: Mon Dec 15, 2003 6:35 pm Post subject:

Redeeman · l33t Joined: 25 Sep 2003 Posts: 958 Location: Portugal

Bowyakka · Posted: Tue Dec 16, 2003 11:25 am Post subject:

WinFS isn't a new filesystem , its mearly a wrapper that sits ontop of ntfs features like streams, its like an sql frontend to the filesystem

Trust me windows longhorn will still be using ntfs as the base filesystem , you just wont be seeing any references to it again from microsoft unless you are a server manager or a developer
_________________
glows in the dark

Mayhem · Posted: Thu Dec 18, 2003 8:10 pm Post subject:

peterton · Tux's lil' helper Joined: 20 Aug 2003 Posts: 110

scharkalvin · Posted: Wed Jun 23, 2004 12:09 pm Post subject: digital cameras?

Olympus uses something resembling the fat file system on their
flash memory cards for their digital cameras.
Currently I can mount these cards via usb-storage under Linux and
read them. Now what happens?

lolowen · n00b Joined: 27 Dec 2003 Posts: 57 Location: UK

Syzar · Tux's lil' helper Joined: 28 Apr 2003 Posts: 76

Fitzsimmons · Posted: Wed Jun 23, 2004 2:55 pm Post subject:

I think the ideal solution is an opensource ext2 with the permissions hacked out of it. Then drivers can be written for every OS ever, including native support in windows (I think this should be possible

). By native support I mean a drive formatted with ext2-nopermissions can be mounted read/write just like any other 'normal' harddrive in windows. Currently reading other filesystems in windows requires a utility since partitions don't just show up as normal.

With this in place, if MS decides to cut support for fat, manufacturers have two choices. Switch to NTFS which is supported on windows, or switch to ext2-nopermissions which is supported everywhere (and also lacks the licencing costs that may incur with NTFS).

placeholder · Advocate Joined: 07 Feb 2004 Posts: 2500

If Linux does have to drop FAT support, there are still many people out there with the kernel sources that include it. In other words, people will still be able to use it just by booting dual kernel with an older one that supports it and a newer one. I'd love to see MS try to stop every last Linux user from doing that. They can't look in at us like they do with WindowsXP users, so they will have no idea.

I see this being the same way with the guy that made the MP3 format. He wants royalties for all the MP3s people make, but nobody ever gives him any. In the end, MS is just going to end up whining because they can't do crap. The only thing in my system (which isn't always in there) that uses FAT are my floppies (until supermount supports ext2 or I use that new thing with along with udev since I already use udev). Therefor, I'm not worried at all.

Fitzsimmons · Posted: Wed Jun 23, 2004 4:30 pm Post subject:

It has been said already: That's all good and fine for the user/pirate market, but it is no good for commercial settings. Microsoft would have someone to sue the pants off of if some company were to try to pull a stunt like that in their newest embedded device.

placeholder · Advocate Joined: 07 Feb 2004 Posts: 2500

Maybe MS is finding a way to allow Linux to gain even more of a lead. :lol: