Originally Posted by videobruce
I thought NTFS might of been a M$ thing (as usual). Why would ext3 be better?
As far as not seeing those files on a Windows PC, wouldn't that be by design? As in some limited (lame) copyright protection?You sort of lost me here. Ext3 or 2 would have the same results, correct?
Sorry, I never really looked into any non M$ OS.
Yes-NTFS is a Microsoft proprietary/undocumented filesystem, but third parties have either licensed Microsoft IP or reverse engineered the filesystem and offer commercial drivers for embedded devices and alternative operating systems, which they obviously charge for. These guys decided to not license the IP required to read/write NTFS.
Ext3 is basically Ext2+Journal which makes it more robust and less likely to corrupt files in case of extreme events.
If the device could format a hard drive itself, it would be very easy for a non-technical user to hookup one of their drives they have used to hold their cherished memories and important information, and the device would have to prompt the user to format the drive in order to use it. People have a nasty habit of clicking yes/OK without actually reading what it says or understanding what they are agreeing to. It would be very easy for someone to inadvertantly wipe all of their important data.
OTOH-not providing the user the ability of the device to format the drive will require the user to (1) go out and find a utility which can create ext2/3 partitions on the drive, (2) install the software onto their computer, (3) then go ahead and delete their existing (NTFS) partiition and re-format as Ext2. The manufacturer can deny any responsibility for when folks lose data. Something along the lines of "Oh-so sorry. We cannot help you. YOU went out of your way to find the software and then YOU went ahead and decided to re-format the drive to use with our product. YOU should have had a backup........"
Either way, customers will be pissed off when they realize they have lost data. Mark my words. It will happen.
Licensing a proper NTFS driver would solve these problems and also provide convenience to the user and be a selling feature instead of a manufacturing cost.
Maybe they think the choice of Ext2 makes it more difficult for people to access the transport streams on the drive, but all it can record is in-the-clear content, so what is the point? I doubt they are using it as a poor mans form of content protection. They have gone out of their way to not provide the ability for the device to create Ext2 partitions since every Linux distro includes this functionality out of the box. I mean the amount of programming required to prompt the user to select a partition name size and click OK amount to all of what about 20 lines of code?
Look at Tvix devices. I have had a Tvix 5000 since ~2006 and using its tuner it can record to NTFS formatted drives.
It can also read/write Ext2/3 but that is not the default.
It is really easy to pull the drive and hookup to a PC and edit the recording with VideoReDo...
This device has fail written all over it to me, but time will tell and hopefully I am wrong.