I presume that if there are enough people still using XP then something will be sorted out?
So, yet more reason to update from XP to something more modern. They're stacking up now...
first ive read about that, interesting, and as said above, hard to stay on win xp now :)
Makes you wonder however whether there's genuine demand for this. You can buy 2 terabyte hard drives for quite reasonable prices. 2TB = 2,000,000MB's and 11% of that is 220GB. Surely manufacturers need to change hard drives completely rather than focusing on just the format.
It would still be compatible with XP, just slightly slower access through emulation.
I've seen few users require more than 80GB hard drives.
xp lets you chnage it ive just looked it just defaults to 512 bytes other options are 1024/2048/4096 at least on this pc
How much more are they planing to put on one disk, i thought 2TB was enough.
from [ame=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NTFS]NTFS - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]
Maximum Volume Size
In theory, the maximum NTFS volume size is 264−1 clusters. However, the maximum NTFS volume size as implemented in Windows XP Professional is 232−1 clusters. For example, using 64 KB clusters, the maximum NTFS volume size is 256 TB minus 64 KB. Using the default cluster size of 4 KB, the maximum NTFS volume size is 16 TB minus 4 KB. (Both of these are vastly higher than the 128 GB limit lifted in Windows XP SP1.) Because partition tables on master boot record (MBR) disks only support partition sizes up to 2 TB, dynamic or GPT volumes must be used to create NTFS volumes over 2 TB. Booting from a GPT volume to a Windows environment requires a system with EFI and 64-bit support.
Under the new standard, the smallest you could go would be 4kb instead of 512 bytes like now.
The article talks about the emulation perhaps causing a 10% decrease in writing speed. I assume that's compared to non-emulated on the same drive. If so, I wonder how much "real" difference it will make? Generally, the increased data density means you can retrieve the data more quickly so compared to an older drive you could find that there's no real change in speed.
I've no doubt we'll continue to get bigger drives for a while yet and people will fill them. I think the first hard drive I used (on an IBM XT) was 5MB and that was massive compared to 360k floppies! We're now nearly a million times that size and on it goes :-)
I doubt this will cause a problem for anyone with XP. In all likelyhood, if they're still using XP they wont need more than 4TB, which is quite easily fitted into a machine using 2*2TB drives. If they need more than this (like me), networkable products will fill this gap in the market.