Is APFS better than HFS+?

>>59615133
Is a prime steak with salt better than eating a 30 year old rotting chicken carcass. Obviously dumb cunt.

>>59615133
>is one special snowflake filesystem better than some other special snowflake operating system?

Nope, both are un-necessary garbage lol.

Just use the NT file system

I doubt you could get worse than HFS+ without trying, and as much as I'm convinced Cook's trying to run the company into the ground I don't think that's the case.

>>59615133
>I doubt you could get worse than HFS+ without trying
Tried NTFS? HFS+ at least pretends to prevent fragmentation rather than running defrag in the background whenever your machine is idle.

>>59615133
Monkey piss combined with shit is better than fucking HFS+.

>>59615674
>buy external harddrive
>plug into mac
>it's not writeable
>have to reformat it to anything but NTFS

I swear, OSX is a bad joke.

>>59616227
Licensing is most likely why, just install Tuxera NTFS

>>59616227
This sucks but can't you compile NTFS-3G+FUSE for Mac OS X?

I remember you could in Mac OS X 10.6

>>59616232
>>59616234
Yeah sure you can use external applications to get the drivers, but even Linux can write to NTFS out of the box now.

>>59615133
How are they going to convert HFS+ to APFS without loss of data on mobile devices that don't have any free space left?

>>59616246
Neat, I really don't give a shit

http://www.cio.com/article/2868393/linus-torvalds-apples-hfs-is-probably-the-worst-file-system-ever.html
>The true horrors of HFS+ are not in how it’s not a great filesystem, but in how it’s actively designed to be a bad filesystem by people who thought they had good ideas.
>The case insensitivity is just a horribly bad idea, and Apple could have pushed fixing it. They didn’t. Instead, they doubled down on a bad idea, and actively extended it – very very badly – to unicode. And it’s not even UTF-8, it’s UCS2 I think.
>And then picking NFD normalization – and making it visible, and actively converting correct unicode into that absolutely horrible format, that’s just inexcusable. Even the people who think normalization is a good thing admit that NFD is a bad format, and certainly not for data exchange. It’s not even “paste-eater” quality thinking. It’s actually actively corrupting user data. By design. Christ.
>And Apple let these monkeys work on their filesystem? Seriously?

>>59616246
I've been using this method for ages now.
https://www.cnet.com/uk/news/how-to-manually-enable-ntfs-read-and-write-in-os-x/

>>59616265
Never mind the clusterfuck that is : and /. MacOS Classic allowed / in filenames and used : to separate path components. UNIX and OS X use / to separate path components and allow : as a normal character. But OS X's GUI allows / like Classic did, but if you type a / in a filename it actually makes a : that is displayed as a /. View it in Terminal and you can see it's really a :.

>>59616250
It already happened.

>>59616250
With any update, it won't let you install them unless you have enough free space remaining, I think it uninstalls some apps then reinstalls them after an update.

exFAT masterrace here

>>59615133
What an achievement writing a better FS than HFS+

>>59616265

What is wrong with case insensitive?

>>59616306

Why do they keep using common and important characters as separators? Why not use a character that would rarely be in a filename, like ` ~ | or ^ ?

>>59616729
>What is wrong with case insensitive?
File and file are the same thing when they shouldn't be.

>>59616729
>What is wrong with case insensitive?
1.It's poorly defined.
2. Every filesystem does it differently.
3. Case-insensitivity is a layering violation.
4. Case-insensitivity forces layering violations upon other code.
5. Case-insensitivity is contagious.
6. Case-insensitivity adds complexity and provides no actual benefit.
http://drewthaler.blogspot.com/2007/12/case-against-insensitivity.html

but speculation is that APFS in macOS will be be case-insensitive as Apple did list it as current limitation for the developer preview:
https://developer.apple.com/library/content/documentation/FileManagement/Conceptual/APFS_Guide/FAQ/FAQ.html#//apple_ref/doc/uid/TP40016999-CH6-DontLinkElementID_1

>>59616752
>File and file are the same thing when they shouldn't be.
debatable.
having both 'File' and 'file' is confusing as fuck for normal users.

>>59616232
>>59616234
tuxera is buggy as fuck
fuse is slow as fuck

use paragon instead

>>59616265
HFS+ can be case-sensitive and always was case-sensitive on iOS

>>59616965
It's still case insensitive by default on OS X, even worse is that using a case sensitive partition can be problematic for some programs.

File: Converter-description.png (43KB, 575x336px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 575x336px

>>59616250
they prolly just convert the metadata and let the data be, so not much free space needed.
same as:
https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Conversion_from_Ext3

>>59615815
XFS masterrace

>>59616176
NTFS is still miles ahead of HFS+.

>>59616671
exFAT cant into journaling.

Accidently unplug without ejecting, lose every fucking thing!

>>59617437
exFAT isn't a journaling filesystem? Jesus, what the fuck?

>>59616250
>>59616608
lol

>>59617061
>NTFS is still miles ahead of HFS+.
Said like someone who has actually used HFS+... I don't think.

>>59617016
sure, linux fs are prolly worse as they all had serious data loss bugs (xfs in 2004, ext4 in 2009). the one must-not-have requirement for any filesystem.

>>59617667
HFS+ user here, anything's better.

>>59617667
please read https://arstechnica.com/apple/2011/07/mac-os-x-10-7/12/
just to pick one highlight:
>File system metadata structures in HFS+ have global locks. Only one process can update the file system at a time.
NTFS not doing that obv makes it way faster.

>>59617437
>Accidently unplug without ejecting, lose every fucking thing!
bullshit.
there at least needs to be a write happening and that one corrupting everything seems very unlikely, except if you only have like on file on it.
even if corrupt, it's simple structure makes it easy to repair. hardly slower than unrolling a journal.

>>59617575
journaling is overrated.
we don't have unstable OS anymore but the speed penalties due to journaling are still real.
google patched journaling out of ext4 for a reason.

>>59616255
Benevolent cuck.

>>59618951
ebin

>>59615133
Still not as good as ZFS.

File: Thank_9ddb6e_1072006.jpg (345KB, 736x936px) Image search: [Google]

345KB, 736x936px

>>59615133

OK I NEED /G/ BRAINS HELP ... SERIOUSLY

i have a question that i cannot find answers too

so i run linux mint and i have been mounting my iphone 6 with HFS+ and dragging and dropping files for years

if this is a new file system i would assume no drivers for linux / win exist yet ????

does this break everything ???? does this mean i no longer can access any device with > iOS 10.3

i am serious -WHY IS THIS NOT BEING TALKED ABOUT ??? DO YOU GET WHAT I AM SAYING ?

>>59619166
nope.
different layers.
it never was possible to mount a fs on two OS at the same time. they wouldn't see each other and thus corrupt the fs.

File: d98fdb0534344c70066f28abff4e4546.jpg (33KB, 500x600px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 500x600px

>>59619347

dude i have been dragging and dropping flac files from my ext4 linux laptops to my hfs+ iphones for almost a decade

sorry if i didnt get the terminology correct but iassume there are no win/oss drivers for the apple file sytem as present and this breaks everything

specifically libimobiledevic afc2 ifuse libraries if you are being a smart ass. is there some backwards compatibility ?

WHY IS THIS NOT BEING TALKED ABOUT ?

>>59616306
>>59616729
NTFS does this too. It uses : to denote a alternate data stream - something similar to resource forks on classic MacOS

>>59616265
Linus is a retard and will probably complain about how default collations on things like SQL Server are case insensitive. You've been able to change the case sensitivity on HFS+ since forever if you really dont like it.

And if you want to go on and on about case sensitivity oddities look at NTFS. The file system is case sensitive but the APIs are not unless you explicit specify posix compatible case sensitivity flags. And since most things which use these APIs such as the command prompt do not specify those flags, good luck deleting the right file if a collision exists.

>>59615133
I like how everyones talking about HFS+ but no one is talking about APFS.

anyway, APFS is now the best filesystem available since APFS>ZFS.

File: BNMsFr2643FroissartFol97vExecHughDespenser.jpg (896KB, 1594x1537px) Image search: [Google]

896KB, 1594x1537px

>>59619762

depends on the support friendo

the best file system in the world doesn't mean shit if i cant mount it on another non apple machine

and vice versa

its 2017 and i still have to explain to mac people why they cant write to that ntfs hard disk that 90% percent of the world uses

file system performance = good
file system read/write compatibility = mandatory (punishable by death)

Wouldn't know. I'm still on El Capitan.

>>59619984
>its 2017 and i still have to explain to mac people why they cant write to that ntfs hard disk that 90% percent of the world uses
But you can without third party software, you just have to edit fstab and specify it is writable.

>>59619984
>its 2017 and i still have to explain to mac people why they cant write to that ntfs hard disk that 90% percent of the world uses
What the fuck are you on about? macOS has a native NTFS driver.

>>59619166
>>59619473
> WHY IS THIS NOT BEING TALKED ABOUT ??? DO YOU GET WHAT I AM SAYING ?
You see, Apple does not provide an afc2 daemon for iOS devices. Apple will write the afc and the drivers for its new filesystem, but you'll have to wait until 10.3 jailbreak. Community will write its own drivers.

>>59616227
Use exfat on external drives.. Works with Vista and newer, and Mac OS X 10.6 and newer.

>>59620048
> macOS has a native NTFS driver.
Read only.

>>59615379
so, destroy all open source filesystems? all of which are snowflakey because people forked them from each other because the didn't like one thing or another

>>59620143
That's just default mount options you fucking retard. Do you even UNIX? Just pass the correct flags to mount.

File: d0b09549cf8474408d51f8f57432cd0a.jpg (44KB, 269x750px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 269x750px

>>59620016
>>59620048
>>59620160

> "simply" needing to fstab edit flags on a Fischer Price operating system just so i can copy something to my friend who runs windows

Fucking hell you apple apologists must be getting fit with all that mental gymnastics

Not having out of the box NTFS writes on OSX for the past 10 years was one of the biggest tech fuck ups that caused more misery to normies than Win ME

ITT: Macfags shilling for their Fagputers

>>59620256
>fstab
You don't need to edit fstab to mount a disk, are you fucking retarded?

>Fucking hell you apple apologists must be getting fit with all that mental gymnastics
The whole point of macOS is that it's POSIX.

>Not having out of the box NTFS writes on OSX for the past 10 years was one of the biggest tech fuck ups that caused more misery to normies than Win ME
Also, you're wrong. External disk plugged in with USB automounts with read+write. I just tried it, so fuck off with your misinformation and Windows shilling.

>>59616942
I disagree. Paragon kept throwing errors when trying to copy files from any drive to HFS for me. The only purpose it served for me was to use it as a read only partition and for that, I don't need expensive ass software.

Tuxera actually works for me.

>>59620289
>Also, you're wrong. External disk plugged in with USB automounts with read+write.

>fuck off with your misinformation

Woah there the irony

External USB NTFS drives -cannot- be written by default unless this was just added in 10.12.4.

>>59620525
You just need to enable the experimental driver in system configuration.

Or mount using command line.

(Alternatively installing one of the gorillean third-party drivers [like fuse ntfs-3g or paragon] through mac-ports or homebrew or whatever)

But seriously, if you are afraid of using the command line, you probably shouldn't be using Mac let alone be on this board.

>>59620572
Macs are usually sold to people who want a computer to work right away without issues, not to people who love to tinker with shit. Your average starbucks problem glasses lady ain't gonna buy that $2000 laptop so she can learn about unix or using the terminal regularly.

I have no qualms about having to use a specific driver for writing on NTFS (I do use one in fact), but to say that it does support out of the box writing on external NTFS drives is a blatant lie, unless, like I said, was added to the latest point update as a feature (which is not listed in any case).

The OS cannot be installed in APFS at the moment.

>>59620725
>Macs are usually sold to people who want a computer to work right away without issues
Uh, no. It's sold to people who want a computer that works, period.

>not to people who love to tinker with shit.
That's wrong, you fucking retard. Apple has ALWAYS been about tinkering, ask any long term Apple user. Ever since Apple II has Apple been popular in the hacker community.

It's also been extremely popular with people who work in creative professions.

>Your average starbucks problem glasses lady ain't gonna buy that $2000 laptop so she can learn about unix or using the terminal regularly.
Who cares about starbuck NEETs, I'm talking about people who use their Macs for work, not sit around and be unemployed.

>I have no qualms about having to use a specific driver for writing on NTFS (I do use one in fact), but to say that it does support out of the box writing on external NTFS drives is a blatant lie
It does support it out of the box, you just write a fucking command OR flick a fucking GUI knob in system settings.

Jesus Christ, I guess you're the sort of person that complains that Linux doesn't work either.

>>59620725
>REEEE YOU'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO USE MAC THAT WAY.!!!!! STOP IT!!!!! USE IT IN THE EXTREMELY LIMITING WAY I SAY IT IS SUPPOSED TO BE USED REEEEEEEEEEE

Maximum autism

>>59620926
>you just write a fucking command
Original statement: "it automounts with read+write", not "I type a command and it mounts with read+write"

>flick a fucking GUI knob in system settings
That's some good shit you're smoking.

Also I still disagree "Apple has ALWAYS been about tinkering", in the last years they have gotten much more done in the safety and security department than letting users do whatever the fuck they want to do. SIP is great and all, but how's that giving a shit about tinkerers is beyond me. You can't even change the fucking system fonts without trouble.

I guess they took away the option to "allow apps downloaded from anywhere" and only allow it with a terminal command because, you know, it's a waste of pixels or some shit. Why would they do it otherwise.

File: C5NMrm4WEAEPaCD.png (166KB, 923x553px) Image search: [Google]

166KB, 923x553px

>>59620888
it can, but not officially supported:
https://twitter.com/TylerLoch/status/834094783618568192

>>59621193
the what th

what

that must be buggy as fuck though. I'd like to try but fuck me

>>59621193
FileVault doesn't work on it.

>>59619762
APFS is missing one killer feature of ZFS:
checksums for the whole filesystem, not just metadata.
so there's still undetected bitrot possible on APFS.
https://arstechnica.com/apple/2016/06/a-zfs-developers-analysis-of-the-good-and-bad-in-apples-new-apfs-file-system/

>>59620926
>Apple has ALWAYS been about tinkering

Is that why their hardware is almost completely unmodular? Or why massive parts of their OS are closed source?

>>59620572
>You just need to enable the experimental driver in system configuration.
why do you think it's called experimental?

>>59621490
>he thinks he cant tinker
>he doesnt know how to reverse engineer

>>59621555
>i-it doesn't matter if it's closed source proprietary shit, just open up IDA Pro and try disassembling the binaries!

>>59621555
>>59621595
with that view every system is for tinkers

>>59619984
I get returns from people buying harddrives for their macs, and complain when they cant write to them. They refuse to let me reformat it for their mac too. It takes 2 seconds, hardly an effort, but they're still mad since someone sold them a harddrive for their mac that "doesn't work".

>>59621555
>he cares about me, see?
>he's just beating me real hard because he wants me to be strong! I'm sure of that!

>>59621595
>just open up IDA Pro and try disassembling the binaries!
You decompile them, not disassemble them. Its a lot easier to read C than assembly.

>>59621651
>IDA
>Interactive Disassembler

>>59615133
no partitions in APFS means more free space for your iPhone as you get to use the "hidden" free space of your system partition.
usually around 2GB but depending on model.

meanwhile Pixel has two system partitions (one backup) and thus wastes a lot of space.

>>59616232
OSX has built in writing to NT, and has done since the PPC days. It's just not enabled.

>>59621231
That's because it's supposed to have transparent encryption built into the filesystem, instead of another layer of bullshit.

>>59621673
Its part of IDA Pro you spurg.

>>59621692
>one backup) and thus wastes a lot of space
That's literally just for seamless updates tho.
Did iPhones ever do this? They need space for the OS, but switching t APFS shouldn't give them any more.

>>59621757
It's also interactive shit that takes forever to use since you have to hand-hold it through the code.

It's not just some fire-and-forget tool, where you pass in some command-line options and go fetch coffee while you wait.

>>59620256
>it's hard to set mount flags
If you're transplanting NTFS hard drives into your apple machines, you're already out of Fisher-Price territory, so who cares?

>>59621857
>plugging a usb hard/flash drive in is transplanting

>>59621874
What USB drive on the planet uses NTFS instead of FAT?

>but i always format my usb drives with ntfs because im a faget
I have yet to see a single one in the wild.

>>59621800
>It's also interactive shit that takes forever to use since you have to hand-hold it through the code.
You've never used IDA Pro have you? You press F5 and it decompiles whatever function you're in. You click on another function in the decompilation window and it will then decompile that.

>It's not just some fire-and-forget tool
You clearly have never used IDA Pro because it literally is.

> where you pass in some command-line options and go fetch coffee while you wait.
And again, you dont pass command line options, you press F5. And you dont wait either

>>59621490
>what is hackintosh
>what is darwin core

>>59621535
>why do you think it's called experimental?
Because Microsoft are closed source kikes.

It's the same reason why NTFS on Linux is flaky as fuck.

>>59621921
I've literally never seen a usb drive using FAT ever

File: bait-7.jpg (32KB, 308x450px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 308x450px

>>59621969

>>59621983
now that's a sound argument

>>59621932
>and it decompiles whatever function you're in
If you only use it for small code snippets, sure.

>You clearly have never used IDA Pro because it literally is.
It literally isn't, you just mentioned how you had to use an IDE for it.

>And again, you dont pass command line options, you press F5. And you dont wait either
You have to use an IDE, and it only works sometimes.

You don't have to wait because you've only use it for small code samples.

>>59621969
Literally all of them come pre-formatted with FAT, and if you think "90%" of people are going to reformat them with NTFS, you are beyond delusional.

>>59621950
NTFS-3g on linux is far from flaky. I have used it for years without trouble.

>>59622002
>NTFS-3g on linux is far from flaky
Last time I used it (3 years ago), it didn't properly NTFS junctions and managed to fuck up the journaling. But you can run NTFS 3g on mac as well, I don't see the problem.

>>59621998
>you just mentioned how you had to use an IDE for it.
I never mentioned this.

>If you only use it for small code snippets, sure.
Again, you've never used this have you?

>You have to use an IDE, and it only works sometimes.
Thank you for proving you've never used IDA Pro

http://hexblog.com/decompilation/video/vd1.html

>>59621999
The one I bought literally yesterday came with FAT32
Which I promptly formatted to NTFS because I like to have files heavier than 4GBs

>>59621997
It is the proper response to what is obviously untruthful bait.

>>59622052
>The one I bought literally yesterday came with FAT32
Did you buy a 10 year old drive?

What _modern_ drive doesn't come formatted with exFAT ?

>>59622052
>and if you think "90%" of people are going to reformat them with NTFS, you are beyond delusional.

>>59622071
Where the fuck do you live where drives are formatted with exFAT

>>59622071
I have never received a USB drive from anyone which has not had FAT32 on it.

>>59622093
>Where the fuck do you live where drives are formatted with exFAT
The real world.

>>59622042
>I never mentioned this.
You mentioned pressing F5, which is something you do in an IDE.

>Again, you've never used this have you?
Have you ever used it for practical examples?

>http://hexblog.com/decompilation/video/vd1.html
Wow, it's toy examples.

>>59622106
No you don't, you wouldn't be going on about a filesystem no one uses otherwise

>mac is shit because you need to use the terminal to do anything useful

>linux is good because the terminal allows you to do some really powerful yet flexible stuff

/g/ logic

>>59622134
>no one uses
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ExFAT

>>59622108
>You mentioned pressing F5, which is something you do in an IDE.
You do that IDA Pro you retard.

>Have you ever used it for practical examples?
Yes, for developing this crack for Starwind VSAN which removes the time check for demo licenses.

This difference file has been created by IDA

StarWindService.exe
0000000000059835: 48 90
0000000000059836: 0F 90
0000000000059837: 47 90
0000000000059838: C1 90
000000000005B8F8: 76 77
000000000008CF1D: 86 87
00000000000C9826: 87 86
00000000000DED21: 74 EB

>Wow, it's toy examples.
Go on jewtube you retard.

>>59622150
Mac is shit because normies use it.

Linux is good because it's too autistic for normies.

This should be pretty apparent.

>>59622071
Most of the drives sold where I work come with NTFS. They're externals from Toshiba.

>>59622172
That's a very nice wikipedia article

File: cringe-7.jpg (6KB, 421x101px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 421x101px

>>59622150
Yeah, it's like /g/ is more than one person.

>>59621857
Adding an external hard drive.
>but FAT
A 4TB external hard drive.

But keep justifying using the command line to do something that has just werked on Linux for years.

>>59622531
>A 4TB external hard drive.
>90% of people

>>59615133
Anything is better than HFS+ at this point.

>>59622548
When did I say 90%?

>>59622561
>When did I say 90%?

>>59619984
>its 2017 and i still have to explain to mac people why they cant write to that ntfs hard disk that 90% percent of the world uses

That was the topic of the discussion.

>>59616942
Tuxera is the least buggy of the three.

Fuse is using the same code base as Tuxera. Tuxera is the main contributor to the NTFS-3G NTFS driver in Linux FUSE.

Even then, Tuxera frequently creates minor errors on NTFS that has to be fixed by Windows Chkdsk.

>>59622592
Uh no it isn't, I can cherrypick any post and say that that's the topic now. That wouldn't even solve the issue because you'd still need to reformat the drive to FAT.
You can keep doing mental gymnastics all you want to avoid admitting that the supposedly polished and user-friendly macOS requires users to use the command line to mount a NTFS drive as writable, while Linux has this functionality out of the box.

>>59621770
>Did iPhones ever do this?
nope, but since the 6s they use NVMe SSDs, so IO is already pretty fast and you wouldn't gain that much but sacrifice space.

meanwhile Pixel managed to have the slowest UFS storage possible.

>switching t APFS shouldn't give them any more.
like said before, no more fixed size partitions means you get to use the empty space previously reserved for the system partition

>>59622685
>You can keep doing mental gymnastics all you want to avoid admitting that the supposedly polished and user-friendly macOS requires users to use the command line to mount a NTFS drive as writable
The point was, though, that it's a pretty small fraction of users that need that, and those that do tend to be technically minded to begin with.

>>59622685
>while Linux has this functionality out of the box.
linux kernel has no support for ntfs.
zillion different distros do zillion different things, most don't come with ntfs-3g installed.

>>59622919
>linux kernel has no support for ntfs.
What is my kernel/fs/ntfs/ntfs.ko then, I wonder?

>>59622823
>that it's a pretty small fraction of users that need that
No, it isn't. You're forgetting (on purpose) that you'd still need to reformat to exFAT. And even then, 90% < 100%.
>those that do tend to be technically minded to begin with.
How does this solve anything? I can do all of this from the command line, doesn't mean I want to.

If it was Linux that wasn't able to write OOTB to NTFS and macOS that could, you'd all be screaming how it was the most important thing of all times, how you couldn't live without it, how embarassing it is that Linux in $CURRENT_YEAR couldn't do it. But since it's macOS, the apologism begins:
>well it's not that necessary
>you can just use the command line anyway
>it's probably better that way
>it only affects a few users
>just use exFAT

>>59622919
>most don't come with ntfs-3g installed.
Blatantly false, and I don't see why I need to compare the collective of Linux distros vs macOS. Fedora can. Ubuntu can. Mint can. macOS can't.

>>59622976
read-only driver, so same as macOS.

>>59619648
>NTFS does this too. It uses : to denote a alternate data stream - something similar to resource forks on classic MacOS
Difference is NTFS simply disallows : and / among others in filenames. It doesn't pretend to allow any character but substitute it with a different character that you see instead in some representations of the filename.

>>59622994
>I can do all of this from the command line, doesn't mean I want to.
What kind of an argument is that? "Sure, I can perfectly well boil water with my black kettle, but I want do use a white kettle instead, so this whole kitchen sucks."

>If it was Linux that wasn't able to write OOTB to NTFS and macOS that could, you'd all be screaming how it was the most important thing of all times, how you couldn't live without it, how embarassing it is that Linux in $CURRENT_YEAR couldn't do it.
It's funny that you should say that since I'm actually a Linux desktop user and have never owned a Mac.
Not to mention both OSX and Linux can read and write NTFS, and for those few that need it, who cares about whether there's a GUI for it.

>>59623121
>"Sure, I can perfectly well boil water with my black kettle, but I want do use a white kettle instead, so this whole kitchen sucks."
Your analogy is flawed: I'm arguing for wanting to do something in a simpler and faster way, you're talking about changing the water.

>Not to mention both OSX and Linux can read and write NTFS, and for those few that need it, who cares about whether there's a GUI for it.
My distro can write to NTFS out of the box, macOS can't. Provide a proper counter-point (no, "LMAO COLORS" isn't one) or shut up.

>>59623148
>macOS can't
But it clearly can, and you're just throwing a tantrum over the fact that there isn't a shiny button to press to do it.

>>59623192
>But it clearly can
Provide proof.

>>59623148
>My distro can write to NTFS out of the box, macOS can't. Provide a proper counter-point (no, "LMAO COLORS" isn't one) or shut up.
the first step to use Linux is to install the OS, which is impossible for the average user.
meanwhile the average user can install a program on their Mac.

>>59623218
I don't understand what you're trying to refute with this. Do you have a counter-point or not?

>>59623215
Are you now arguing that OSX simply lacks write support for NTFS? I can't counter that myself since I've never owned a Mac, but there seemed to be general consensus that it's perfectly capable, and you didn't seem to question it either, only the fact that "there's no GUI for it".

>>59623237
No, it isn't any more capable than Linux is of running photoshop: if you install this and run this and do that, it works. That's not out of the box.

I'm not saying it's horrible, but it's definitely not user-friendly, and it's retarded how it hasn't been added. I mean, groups like nouveau can retroengineer nVidia drivers in fucking international waters, but Apple can't add native NTFS write support?

>>59623237
You have to install a third-party thingy which isn't guaranteed not to fuck shit up.

>>59623274
The web seems to agree that all you have to do is add the rw mount option when mounting ntfs volumes on OSX.

>>59623344
Do you not understand what out of the box means? Do you expect some facebook grandma to understand UNIX permissions?

>>59623370
>Do you not understand what out of the box means?
Normally, "out of the box" means "without 3rd party addons".

>Do you expect some facebook grandma to understand UNIX permissions?
Why do I feel like we've stepped backwards in this discussion again.

>>59623148

>My distro can write to NTFS out of the box, macOS can't.

oh lawdy, meanwhile there are other distributions where that is not the case, that's ok though i can just

>apt install ntfs-3g
>pacman -s ntfs-3g
>zypper install ntfs-3g
>dnf install ntfs-3g
>brew install ntfs-3g

WOWIE SO FUCKING HARD

>>59623370
>Do you expect some facebook grandma to understand UNIX permissions?
Do you expect some facebook grandma to need NTFS write support on her Mac?

>>59623274

>I'm not saying it's horrible, but it's definitely not user-friendly, and it's retarded how it hasn't been added.

How do i put this best....

>NTFS is PROPRIETARY TO MICROSOFT
>Clean room re implementations like ntfs-3g are not perfect and CAN CAUSE DATA LOSS

By not having a nice shiny button to enable writing to NTFS volumes, and making them read-only out of the box Apple is covering their asses. That is not going to change.

If you really, really want to write to that NTFS volume, then you the user have to go out of your way to do so, and implicitly understand the risks involved.

Quit being this autistic and use your fucking brain.

>>59623274
>but Apple can't add native NTFS write support?
Apple doesn't release shit and with MS keeping the NTFS spec a secret, there's only shitty reversing available.

>>59623613
to be fair the linux kernel also cares about quality and doesn't allow shitty ntfs drivers in.

>>59623532
>Clean room re implementations like ntfs-3g are not perfect and CAN CAUSE DATA LOSS
The sentence "is not perfect" is true of any piece of software ever designed, and "can cause data loss" is true of any piece of software ever designed that does IO. Do you have any evidence supporting the case that ntfs-3g is noticeably worse than the proprietary driver? Because I have been using it for several years with no problem whatsoever, in fact I have a windows installation where it can't open a certain folder and says it's corrupt, while fedora with ntfs-3g can open, read and write to it.
Even in a world where this was true, a simple disclaimer about "we're not responsible for any data loss, blah blah" would suffice.

>le autism xD
Wow, you sure showed me with that 2010 insult.

>>59623688
>Because I have been using it for several years with no problem whatsoever, in fact I have a windows installation where it can't open a certain folder and says it's corrupt, while fedora with ntfs-3g can open, read and write to it.
in actual fact, that's a problem as Windows is reference NTFS implementation and ntfs-3g did create some shit that only it can read.

>>59623841
I have also seen Windows create some shit that only ntfs-3g can read.
>Boot Windows, bluescreen, filesystem error.
>Boot Linux, everything is fine.
>Boot Hirens Boot CD Windows to chkdsk, won't even parse the filesystem enough to fix it.
>Boot back to Linux, ntfsfix, now Windows works perfectly.

Admit it already, ntfs-3g is the better implementation. Not only can it effortlessly handle corrupted filesystems Windows won't even touch, it can fix shit that Windows fucked up.

>>59617754
but anon i can open two files in two programs. effectively your reasoning is invalid

is APFS the end of hackintoshes?

>>59620256
>he doesn't know how to pass write/exec. flags

>>59623688

>Do you have any evidence supporting the case that ntfs-3g is noticeably worse than the proprietary driver?

The ntfs-3g team has to reverse engineer the driver since they don't have access to the source code.

>Because I have been using it for several years with no problem whatsoever, in fact I have a windows installation where it can't open a certain folder and says it's corrupt, while fedora with ntfs-3g can open, read and write to it.

cool story bro.

>The sentence "is not perfect" is true of any piece of software ever designed, and "can cause data loss" is true of any piece of software ever designed that does IO.

k.

>Wow, you sure showed me with that 2010 insult.

I did, you completely missed the implied legal ramifications of Apple officially supporting a reverse engineered implementation of NTFS. The team behind ntfs-3g has done a great job making it work most of the time but they don't have access to the source code, and will never achieve full compatibility with Microsoft NTFS without it.

Apple is not going to risk that and leave themselves open to lawsuits because the driver trashed some very important customer's bootcamp partition. It only needs to happen once and the lawyers will have a field day lording over Apple about how they knew that ntfs-3g wasn't 100% compatible with Microsoft NTFS and yet they still gave their users a false sense of security by having r/w enabled by default.

>>59624246
>The ntfs-3g team has to reverse engineer the driver since they don't have access to the source code.
And they coded their implementation more defensively. I've seen Windows make shit Windows can't read, and I've occasionally seen ntfs-3g make shit Windows can't read. But I've never seen either produce shit that ntfs-3g can't read but Windows can.

>>59624048

ntfsfix doesn't know exactly why an NTFS volume is fucked up, and doesn't care, it just fixes some common inconsistencies and clears the journal, regardless of whether that was the issue or if it even fixes what caused NTFS to flag the volume as corrupted.

>>59624272

again, missing the fucking point.

>>59624272
nice anecdata, but wrong:
http://www.tuxera.com/community/ntfs-3g-faq/#compressed

also strange definition of defensively:
failing on first error is usually considered more defensive than aggressively trying to read it anyway.

>>59624421
>ntfsfix doesn't know exactly why an NTFS volume is fucked up, and doesn't care, it just fixes some common inconsistencies and clears the journal, regardless of whether that was the issue or if it even fixes what caused NTFS to flag the volume as corrupted.
Yes, so you use chkdsk most of the time, and ntfsfix when chkdsk can't do it.
>>59624445
Read aggressively, write defensively sounds like what you would want on a filesystem. If my filesystem is messed up, I want my data out of it. An error saying there's some unfixable inconsistency and it's refusing to read it is useless.

Now, if it's allowing *writes* to a fucked filesystem instead of mounting read only, that's a problem.

>>59624445
>NTFS compressed files
What is this, 1998? Disks are big. No need to take the CPU hit on disk access.

>>59615133
zfs

>>59622134
Most TVs, consoles, modems/routers, accept exFAT as default.

>>59616671
F2FS is better.

>>59624574
Your point being?

>>59622093
Even bought an SD card bigger than 32 GB? It comes preformatted exFAT.

>>59624535
>What is this, 1998? Disks are big. No need to take the CPU hit on disk access.
You do realize that deduplication is a thing? And that it compresses chunks? It is widely used in the enterprise space.

>>59624735
only wincucks pretending to run servers care about NTFS

>>59624604
Google disagrees and switched back from their short affair with f2fs to ext4 on the Nexus 6 bring-up and stayed on ext4 ever since.
Google also doubled-down on ext4 and decided to implement encryption for it and employs the ext4 maintainer.

f2fs is Samsung's creation and prolly still isn't that great at basics like error recovery and prolly half-abandoned considering no Samsung smartphone uses it and the initial plan was for the Galaxy S3 in 2012.

doesn't look that good for linux, considering btrfs still isnt' stable:
https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Status

and ZFS isn't really suited for Linux for technical reasons (Linux's kernel stacks are limited to 2 pages, crippled in-kernel virtual memory) and licensing ones.

so Apple is one-generation ahead on filesystems.

>>59625082
where else do you run Exchange, retard?

>>59625111
>run Exchange
It's for toddlers. Why would you run it?

>>59624246
>Apple is not going to risk that and leave themselves open to lawsuits because the driver trashed some very important customer's bootcamp partition.
From the Apple license for macOS Sierra:
>8. Limitation of Liability.
>TO THE EXTENT NOT PROHIBITED BY APPLICABLE LAW, IN NO EVENT
SHALL APPLE BE LIABLE FOR PERSONAL INJURY, OR ANY INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, INDIRECT OR
CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES WHATSOEVER, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, DAMAGES FOR
LOSS OF PROFITS, CORRUPTION OR LOSS OF DATA (...)
You're making up problems.

>>59625090
APFS does seem like the best filesystem currently, especially with things like unfixed-size partitions. And it's here to replace one of the very worst.

>>59625090
> doesn't look that good for linux, considering btrfs still isnt' stable
> and ZFS isn't really suited for Linux for technical reasons
May I point out that the world's storage servers, big databases, clouds and so on are primarily using Linux?

XFS, JFS, btrfs, ext4 are getting used on peta and exabyte scales. If anything is "good" at storing and managing data safely, it's Linux.

>>59625230
>XFS, JFS, btrfs, ext4 are getting used on peta and exabyte scales.
They're not. They generally dont even use traditional file systems at this point. They use object storage.

>>59620270
>ITT: Technology enthusiasts discuss technology
FTFY

>>59625398
Object etc. storages for the cloud are still usually backed on these conventional filesystems.

>>59621921
External HDDs, pre-exFAT >32GB flash drives

On a related note, why can I format a ≥32GB flash drive to FAT32 with OS X and use it with Windows but Windows won't format a ≥32GB flash drive as FAT32?

>>59625484
>Object etc. storages for the cloud are still usually backed on these conventional filesystems.
They dont. The only thing that even uses a file system on them is for the boot disks. The data disks are all treated as raw block storage devices. I used to work for a object storage vendor.

>>59625520
Varies with deployment. I've seen multiple backed in XFS and even some on JFS or ext4.

You'll have no trouble finding references to object storages on XFS, regardless of what your former work place did.

>>59621936
Hackintosh is becoming less and less viable because of Apple's refusal to support GPUs that are less than 3 years old.

>>59625612
most object storages have a shit reputation and reliability.
not sure how it's fair to blame the underlying fs, which is mostly interchangeable.