Oliver Wong wrote:
>
> "Ian Hilliard" <nospam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:9f689$45424069$544a537b$14800@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Oliver Wong wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> "Roy Schestowitz" <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>>> news:2163690.oXFsKD8Lk2@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>> Edgy/XP NTFS/ext3 Writing
>>>>
>>>> ,----[ Quote ]
>>>> | Results
>>>> |
>>>> | OS NTFS to ext3 ext3 to NTFS NTFS to NTFS
>>>> | Ubuntu Edgy 4.63 5.67 3.85
>>>> | Windows XP 2.82 2.82 3.57
>>>> `----
>>>>
>>>> http://www.urunu.com/wp/2006/10/27/edgyxp-ntfsext3-writing/
>>>
>>> Out of curiosity, how do the numbers presented here lead you to the
>>> conclusion in your subject line?
>>>
>>> - Oliver
>>
>> If you would care to look at the article, you would see that they are
>> transfer rates. Hence, bigger is better.
>
> I did read the article. To me, the figures suggest that Ubuntu Edgy
> does
> copies faster than Windows. It doesn't say anything about ext3 versus
> NTFS. For that, you'd probably want to compare an "NTFS to NTFS" column
> against a "ext3 to ext3" column.
>
> - Oliver
It says something in so far as NTFS to Ext3 and Ext3 to NTFS is considerably
faster than NTFS to NTFS.
Ian
|
|
