[Sesquipedalian]

This is my Compaq Presario 2100 laptop.

[TopAce]

You revealed to our junior members that we have a Grognard forum.

Shame on you.

Nice machine, by the way.

[vyper]

It's been posted before TA.

Sesq, how dare I ask does one get OS X to run on a PC laptop?

[Kazan]

you get sued by apple?

[Sesquipedalian]

It takes work, but not too much.  osx86project.org have several guides in their wiki.

Anyway, I am dual booting XP and OS X.  It took a fair bit of tweaking to get OS X to work with all of my hardware, but it can be done.

[Bobboau]

can't read NTFS though, can it?

[Kazan]

it should be able to - it's a unix kernel

[Martinus]

[color=66ff00]Yeah but isn't NTFS only partially working? Writing is very shaky from what I've read.
[/color]

[CP5670]

I don't like NTFS. It's slow and gets fragmented easily, and I don't need the compression and encryption functionality. It would be too much work for me to switch back at this point though.

You revealed to our junior members that we have a Grognard forum.

Shame on you.

Nice machine, by the way.

It's only visible to some people? I thought it was always there...

[Kie99]

It's only visible to moderators and administrators.  At least, it's supposed to be.

[Descenterace]

NTFS? Slow?

Compared to ext3 for normal use, yes, but for lots of small files it kicks the ass of most filesystems out there. Although I think ReiserFS still wins.

[CP5670]

FAT32 was much better in terms of speed as far as I can see. Just try loading up any directory with a lot of files, like the windows\system32 directory, in a file manager program. It used to come up instantly when I was using FAT32 (and still does on my laptop's FAT32 formatted but otherwise slower hard drive), but takes almost eight seconds on NTFS.

Of course, if it's actually has additional protection measures against data loss like they say, then it's probably worth it anyway.

[Kazan]

CP5670: FAT32 is more of a real filesystem than NTFS

NTFS is a database

[Sandwich]

How smoothly do the fluid OSX window animation effects work on that lappy?

[SadisticSid]

Hmm, I got OSX to run natively on my Ferarri 4005 but it ran more slowly than in VMWare... complete waste of time hehe.

[karajorma]

Originally posted by CP5670
FAT32 was much better in terms of speed as far as I can see. Just try loading up any directory with a lot of files, like the windows\system32 directory, in a file manager program. It used to come up instantly when I was using FAT32 (and still does on my laptop's FAT32 formatted but otherwise slower hard drive), but takes almost eight seconds on NTFS.

Of course, if it's actually has additional protection measures against data loss like they say, then it's probably worth it anyway.

Not to mention that if you bought a 250GB HD you're going to get awfully sick of making 32GB partitions very quickly.

NTFS also does a better job of saving your files efficiently. FAT32 wastes all kinds of disk space due to it having to use ridiculously big cluster sizes.

[CP5670]

eh? FAT32 can support up to 2TB or something. The Windows installer cannot format partitions over 32GB, but the utilities that come with hard drives have no trouble with it.

FAT32 does require larger cluster sizes, but I have plenty of disk space to spare and would much rather have the additional performance.

[karajorma]

Problem lies a bit deeper than that actually.

Clicky

[CP5670]

It worked fine for me for over a year. I was using a 160GB drive in Windows ME. Anyway, that link backs up what I said; you can't format drives that big using the Windows installer, but they work okay otherwise.

The only real limit is the 4GB one for individual files, but I never had any files that big.

I guess this is getting a bit off topic...

[BlackDove]

That's nice.

Everyone who's tried it and has ss2 has done it already though. I've seen boot up videos, quite nice actually, but so far, a complete waste of time until the OSX's power can be utilised positively.