Best formatting for external HD for use with MacOS and Windows
-
@Nic This is general storage. I don't like how NTFS is read-only by default on MacOS.
-
@Katie yeah, Windows is a bit of a pain in the ass about allowing access to the NTFS format, which is why I like HFS better if you need big files. You can get utilities to write NTFS on Mac, but you'll have to pay for them.. If you don't have any files larger than 4GB then exFAT is perfectly fine - that's usually what most USB drives are formatted with for compatibility.
-
Bottom line is that disks should not be shared as DAS / SAN between disparate systems like that. This is where NAS is the correct technology.
-
Agreed, but I was assuming this was just ad-hoc home storage, right Katie? If it is for a work application then I'll defer to SAM
-
Her Mac and her PC are both work machines. I'm assuming that it is work related.
-
This post is deleted! -
@scottalanmiller Yes, ad-hoc storage - I have a 1TB hard drive that I want to format in the most efficient way possible for use with both my work machines.
-
A small ReadyNAS, Synology or Buffalo two bay NAS unit would be ideal. RAID 1 and SMB/CIFS sharing.
-
agreed, a NAS is the way to go.
If you have a single printer you want to share with both computers, you don't want to have to move a cable between the systems - you buy a network attached printer and share it with both.. the same applies to storage.
-
Never thought of comparing to a printer but that works well.
-
The only reason I can think of for an external drive over doing it the way SAM and Dashrender suggestion is if you need to move a large amount of data more quickly. USB can be faster than over the network.
-
@Nic said:
The only reason I can think of for an external drive over doing it the way SAM and Dashrender suggestion is if you need to move a large amount of data more quickly. USB can be faster than over the network.
Except the drives themselves are generally the bottleneck there. Unless you get a Drobo 5D the drives will be too slow for it to matter.
And with NAS you can copy from one to the other immediately. No need to unplug. And you can use over the wireless.
-
True, but aren't the drives + USB still potentially faster than wireless?
-
@Nic said:
True, but aren't the drives + USB still potentially faster than wireless?
Yes but you can't count the limitations of a "bonus feature" as a negative against core features. That's like having a sports car that is faster than another and can haul a boat. But going for the slower option that can't haul a boat because the faster one can't maintain its speed advantage while hauling a boat
-
Agreed, but if all she needs to do is move a shit ton of stuff between two computers, and doesn't want to buy more than the external drive she already has, then why not?
If all she needs is some additional storage without additional purchase, just plug the drive into one of the computers and share it over the network from there. Agreed that the convenience of having the storage available over the network probably outweighs the speed issue. But I have just used the sneakernet method when copying my library of movies from one computer to another.
-
@nic I have to assume you're talking about USB 3 being faster than LAN speeds. My personal tests have shown a NAS on 100 Mb LAN copies much faster than USB 2.0.
-
I was assuming wireless, which would get lesser throughput. If on a wired LAN then I agree that would be faster. If it is a USB 3.0 drive how much difference would that make?
-
Looks like USB 3.0 supports up to 5 Mb, the SATA drives claim 6 Mb, but I'm sure the single drive would be the bottle neck on the USB 3.0 interface.
I guess I never assume wireless for work networks, at least not for It personal. But maybe that's just me with my blinders on. I avoid wireless for anything more than casual surfing.
-
@Katie said:
@scottalanmiller Yes, ad-hoc storage - I have a 1TB hard drive that I want to format in the most efficient way possible for use with both my work machines.
Big thought is where the Time Machine backup is. Not mandatory, but close. Keep in mind the ability for current OS X versions to have multiple Time Machine mount points (say, one at home and one at the office with each being encrypted as well as the laptop itself).
Best interfaces for an external drive between the two platforms would be Thunderbolt for OS X and USB3 for Windows 7/8. Partition one for OS X and one for NTFS. Main reason is to be able to encrypt both. Would suck to lose (or "lose") the drive.
Can get a 2TB rugged drive from LaCie with Thunderbolt & USB3—
- http://www.lacie.com/products/product.htm?id=10599
- Yes, seeing the 1TB drive already available
Macally tends to have Mac friendly enclosures (FW800), but aren't on the cutting edge (Thunderbolt).
For the OS X NTFS utilities @nic alluded, check—
- http://www.paragon-software.com/home/ntfs-mac/ ($20, more popular option & works well enough)
- http://www.tuxera.com/products/tuxera-ntfs-for-mac/ ($31, haven't used)
- http://osxfuse.github.io/ -and- https://github.com/osxfuse/osxfuse/wiki/NTFS-3G (haven't used)
- http://www.catacombae.org/hfsx.html (old & haven't used)
- Good perspective, http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1386199
-
Here you go, another possible solution:
http://www.geek.com/tablets/toshiba-canvio-adapter-makes-any-external-hard-drive-wireless-1588614/
