The FAT file system is the file system used by MS-DOS and earlier versions of Windows. It's a relatively simple and straightforward file system, supported by just about any operating system, making it the favoured file system on memory cards and the like. FAT is an ECMA and ISO standard, but these only apply for FAT12 and FAT16 without support for long file names, and therein lies a problem.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2005-07-06
When in doubt, rather than addressing what I raise the parasites of OSNews.com come out and silence a critic - why aren't I surprised. All talk about freedom but when it comes to descenting ideas its all ok to ambush and beat up the me.
Kroc, you want to know why the quality of submissions and readers have decreased - the moderation system speaks for itself; where organised mobs can silence a single opinion.
Member since:2005-07-06
...the moderation system speaks for itself; where organised mobs can silence a single opinion.
Only to those who prefer to have a group censored view presented to them.
I don't believe in plus/minus moderation with level selection. If you follow the default, at best you get non-controversial light conversation, at worst you get the lowest common denominator blah blah.
So I always select the lowest level possible to view what people say.
On the other hand, if had to vote on your post, it would have gone down. It was an off-topic adhominem at Lemur.
Member since:
2005-07-06
None of Microsoft's desktop technologies that have representation via a work-alikes in Linux have no prior art. Computers have been around a very long time, and Linux's basic architecture is essentially POSIX compliant, it is a work-alike of a 30-plus-year-old operating system that predates Windows by at least ten years.
The OIN and the Patent Commons have a not-insignificant patent pool themselves covering Linux workings.
Much of the underlying technologies of operating systems, such as SMP and RCU and multi-user and hierarchical directories and pipes and a myriad other things are technologies owned and invented by IBM, Novell, Sun and others, not Microsoft.
If you have not got any specific claims here, your suppositions amount to no more than bluff and bluster.
Yet another pathetic post from lemur2 ignoring my post in its entirity - but hey, you keep spouting crap about things you know nothing about. The issue is patents and payments. Patents for technology that allows flawless compatibility and security knowing for the customers knowing that everything is kosher and above board.
You might live in lalalala land where you can pick and choose what laws and legal precedents to respect but for the vast majority of companies they have to operate in the real world - you know, the real world? or are you so geeked up on your own ego that you ignore reality in favour of firing off posts that never address a single thing I state in my posts?
Edited 2009-07-03 08:12 UTC