Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 13th Mar 2009 08:28 UTC
The whole FAT licensing saga between Microsoft and TomTom just got a whole lot more complicated. Microsoft sued TomTom because the satnav maker had not licensed FAT from Microsoft, even though several others have. This left TomTom in a difficult position: not license it, and face legal penalties - license it, and violate the GPL. The second part, however, is up for debate now: the terms under which Microsoft licenses FAT may not violate the GPL at all. Near-instant update: On Slashdot, Bruce Perens and Jeremy Allison have explained that the FAT terms are still a GPL violation. Allison accidentally emailed the journalist who wrote this story with the wrong information.
Thread beginning with comment 353048
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Why not using a different file system? - SD cards
by Liquidator on Fri 13th Mar 2009 13:29
in reply to "RE: Why not using a different file system? - SD cards"
Member since:2007-03-04
SD cards.. FAT. And the TomTom has a nice big standard SD slot on the side of most units.
Most units? No. My TomTom doesn't have an SD slot. Nor did other TomToms of the store where I bought it. But still, this doesn't make your point less insightful. But as I said, a TomTom isn't supposed to be used as an USB flash drive, so if you're able to copy files to its memory or not is not a problem. What's important is that you can update it.
RE[3]: Why not using a different file system? - SD cards
by jabbotts on Fri 13th Mar 2009 19:34
in reply to "RE[2]: Why not using a different file system? - SD cards"
Member since:2007-09-06
I cover my GPS needs with an N810 so the only TomTom I've had hands on was one recently purchased by a family member.
SD slot
video player
music player
image viewer
basic PIM
.. oh.. hehe.. and GPS related functions.
Good to be corrected on the product line though as it's not something I've had reason to look into directly. Maps, Maemo Mapper and a few other GPS enabled programs cover my personal needs.
RE[2]: Why not using a different file system? - SD cards
by steogede2 on Fri 13th Mar 2009 22:15
in reply to "RE: Why not using a different file system? - SD cards"
Member since:2007-08-17
RE[2]: Why not using a different file system? - SD cards
by anda_skoa on Sat 14th Mar 2009 13:26
in reply to "RE: Why not using a different file system? - SD cards"
Member since:2005-07-07
While it would be a brave move and technically easy to write in the function, TomTom can't simply go "New SD card detected. Card needs to be formated for use which will make it unreadable by your Windows desktop, allow or deny?"
It'd be nice to see native ext3 or other formats outside of fat/ntfs shipping with Windows but t'aint going to happen in my lifetime likely.
Well, seems alls recent operation system (and if one uses an older version even ancient ones like Windows 98), support UDF http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Disk_Format
RE[3]: Why not using a different file system? - SD card
by darknexus on Sun 15th Mar 2009 10:20
in reply to "RE[2]: Why not using a different file system? - SD cards"
Member since:2008-07-15
Well, seems alls recent operation system (and if one uses an older version even ancient ones like Windows 98), support UDF
Wow, I hadn't realized UDF was that versatile. I'd always thought of it as a filesystem used on DVDs, and it being read-only like iso9660 was. I was very wrong about this. I should've researched exactly what UDF was a long time ago, as it could have saved me a great deal of headaches a while back when I was moving some large files between OS X and Linux, files that were too big for fat32 to handle.
I'm experimenting with a USB drive formatted as plain UDF 1.02 (most compatible revision) and so far I'm actually quite pleased with the results. Only problem is OS X won't mount it through the Finder, though it will mount it if explicitly told to do so from the CLI, and obviously it reads UDF DVDs fine. Apparently UDF is not in the filesystem checks on USB media, wonder if I can change that. Linux and even my friend's Windows machine had no problems with it at all, and I'm not noticing any performance issues or problems with recovering free space after files have been deleted.
I'll definitely keep playing with this, I just might have to adopt UDF as my filesystem of choice for external media if I don't encounter any issues.
RE[2]: Why not using a different file system? - SD cards
by Lennie on Sun 15th Mar 2009 13:06
in reply to "RE: Why not using a different file system? - SD cards"
Member since:2007-09-22
RE[3]: Why not using a different file system? - SD card
by darknexus on Sun 15th Mar 2009 14:03
in reply to "RE[2]: Why not using a different file system? - SD cards"
Member since:2008-07-15
Member since:
2007-09-06
This is an old issue as I see it. Floppies all shipped FAT so either they where reformatted or your system had to be able to read FAT. Windows, osX and your favorite flavor of *nix will read a preformed diskette.
Flashdrives, same thing.. all reformatted FAT so either your platform can read FAT or you accept second class citizenship.
SD cards.. FAT. And the TomTom has a nice big standard SD slot on the side of most units. Even if they recompiled the internal OS image to use ext2, they still have that external slot for the removable SD.
While it would be a brave move and technically easy to write in the function, TomTom can't simply go "New SD card detected. Card needs to be formated for use which will make it unreadable by your Windows desktop, allow or deny?"
It'd be nice to see native ext3 or other formats outside of fat/ntfs shipping with Windows but t'aint going to happen in my lifetime likely.