Path: csiph.com!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!feeder.erje.net!eu.feeder.erje.net!news.swapon.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail From: Jolly Roger Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.system Subject: Re: Thumb-drive format Date: 29 Jul 2014 01:18:54 GMT Organization: People for the Ethical Treatment of Pirates Lines: 45 Message-ID: References: <2014072212484624068-xxx@yyyzzz> <220720141556414588%nospam@nospam.invalid> <2014072214405916785-xxx@yyyzzz> <230720141315271710%YourName@YourISP.com> <7bcus99241d5pugk53kc9qmd8hqb6eknhh@4ax.com> <230720140001156390%nospam@nospam.invalid> <8130t919376dfusc91u206va6perumg01k@4ax.com> <230720141639340056%nospam@nospam.invalid> <230720142309319797%timstreater@greenbee.net> X-Trace: individual.net VZafziJP6SlUCXYFcaW2ngNaEVKKSN4iO+U6KNAljEuYDsh66E Cancel-Lock: sha1:633fnxaRGQcGsnSNhwM3t6U9hpY= X-Face: _.g>n!a$f3/H3jA]>9pN55*5<`}Tud57>1Y%b|b-Y~()~\t,LZ3e up1/bO{=-) User-Agent: slrn/1.0.1 (Darwin) Xref: csiph.com comp.sys.mac.system:62542 On 2014-07-29, Lewis wrote: > Okay, so one time? In band camp? Jolly Roger was all, like: >>> >>> Um.. what? You can't write to an NTFS volume under OS X without >>> installing something like MacFuse and a NTFS plugin. > >> So install it. Simple. > >>> It's not difficult, > >> Exactly. > >>> but it is also astonishingly slow. Unless it's gotten a LOT better, it >>> capped out for me at about 4MB/s (or about the same as my download >>> speed), far short of the ~60MB/s I get copying to other formats. > >> We're talking about thumb drives, where speed isn't critical. > > Filling a 32GB thumb drive would take over 2 hours. I'm sorry, but if those are the speeds you saw personally, something was wrong. And some data seems to suggest you are wrong: No offense, but I'll take real data and empirical evidence over the blathering of some random internet mouth piece in just about every subject imaginable. : ) >> And you're >> ignoring the fact that such software, while it may or may not be >> considered slow, does work reliably, which is counter to what >> mr.know-it-all suggests. > > Yeah, I didn't have any trouble with it working, just with it working > very very slowly. Your experience doesn't seem to be representative of others, including me. Sorry about that. -- E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter. I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead. JR