Go Back   Wireless and Wifi Forums > Cellular Communications > Cellular Newsgroups > uk.telecom.mobile
Register FAQ Forum Rules Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Advertise Mark Forums Read

 
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 04-10-2012, 10:22 PM
Jake
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default C2-01 memory card

The documentation says it will take 16GB max. This will be a microSDHC.

Any good reason why it won't take 32GB?



Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 04-12-2012, 12:03 AM
Denis McMahon
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: C2-01 memory card

On Tue, 10 Apr 2012 22:22:31 +0100, Jake wrote:

> The documentation says it will take 16GB max. This will be a microSDHC.
>
> Any good reason why it won't take 32GB?


Proprietary card formatting? Crippled file handling implementation? Idiot
writing the blurb?

Rgds

Denis McMahon

Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 04-12-2012, 12:15 AM
Jake
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: C2-01 memory card


"Denis McMahon" <denismfmcmahon@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:4f860daf$0$2822$a8266bb1@newsreader.readnews. com...
> On Tue, 10 Apr 2012 22:22:31 +0100, Jake wrote:
>
>> The documentation says it will take 16GB max. This will be a microSDHC.
>>
>> Any good reason why it won't take 32GB?

>
> Proprietary card formatting? Crippled file handling implementation? Idiot
> writing the blurb?


I was guessing at the time that they wrote the blurb when 16GB was the
largest available card you could buy.



Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 04-12-2012, 02:03 PM
Denis McMahon
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: C2-01 memory card

On Thu, 12 Apr 2012 00:15:34 +0100, Jake wrote:

> "Denis McMahon" <denismfmcmahon@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:4f860daf$0$2822$a8266bb1@newsreader.readnews. com...
>> On Tue, 10 Apr 2012 22:22:31 +0100, Jake wrote:
>>
>>> The documentation says it will take 16GB max. This will be a
>>> microSDHC.
>>>
>>> Any good reason why it won't take 32GB?

>>
>> Proprietary card formatting? Crippled file handling implementation?
>> Idiot writing the blurb?

>
> I was guessing at the time that they wrote the blurb when 16GB was the
> largest available card you could buy.


I thought that SDHC implied at least 32Gb ....

Rgds

Denis McMahon

Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 04-12-2012, 04:46 PM
R. Mark Clayton
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: C2-01 memory card


"Anthony R. Gold" <not-for-mail@ahjg.co.uk> wrote in message
news:l8ndo7l2k3shs2k5n80nd9hfqg7gcqi6s4@4ax.com...
> On 12 Apr 2012 13:03:38 GMT, Denis McMahon <denismfmcmahon@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I thought that SDHC implied at least 32Gb ....

>
> No, at most. SDHC implies from 4GB minimum up to 32GB maximum.
>
> https://www.sdcard.org/consumers/choices/


Actually you can get 2Gb SDHC.



Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 04-12-2012, 05:28 PM
Roland Perry
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: C2-01 memory card

In message <l8ndo7l2k3shs2k5n80nd9hfqg7gcqi6s4@4ax.com>, at 14:54:02 on
Thu, 12 Apr 2012, Anthony R. Gold <not-for-mail@ahjg.co.uk> remarked:

>> I thought that SDHC implied at least 32Gb ....

>
>No, at most. SDHC implies from 4GB minimum up to 32GB maximum.


And there can be other irritating restrictions. My Win7 laptop has an
SDHC socket and works perfectly well with a 16GB card, until I tried to
copy a 10GB file onto it the other day and was told "<the file> is too
large for the destination file system".
--
Roland Perry

Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 04-12-2012, 06:07 PM
Andy Burns
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: C2-01 memory card

Roland Perry wrote:

> Anthony R. Gold <not-for-mail@ahjg.co.uk> remarked:
>
>> SDHC implies from 4GB minimum up to 32GB maximum.

>
> And there can be other irritating restrictions. My Win7 laptop has an
> SDHC socket and works perfectly well with a 16GB card, until I tried to
> copy a 10GB file onto it the other day and was told "<the file> is too
> large for the destination file system".


But isn't that simply a FAT32 limitation, rather than SDHC?


Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old 04-12-2012, 06:25 PM
Roland Perry
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: C2-01 memory card

In message <qb2eo7db9i2nnegr8srav24nqfvkkii80s@4ax.com>, at 18:06:06 on
Thu, 12 Apr 2012, Anthony R. Gold <not-for-mail@ahjg.co.uk> remarked:
>> And there can be other irritating restrictions. My Win7 laptop has an
>> SDHC socket and works perfectly well with a 16GB card, until I tried to
>> copy a 10GB file onto it the other day and was told "<the file> is too
>> large for the destination file system".

>
>With which file system was the card formatted? FAT32 can only handle up to
>4GB (minus one byte) per file. Did you try NTFS?


That may be it. FAT32.

By some freak chance, an earlier file on the card was 2Kb less than
4GB!!
--
Roland Perry

Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old 04-14-2012, 02:44 PM
Andy Burns
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: C2-01 memory card

Gordon Freeman wrote:

> For SDXC I believe a souped up variant of FAT32 has been created for
> cards of over 32GB, I wonder if this allows files of over 4GB


There is exFAT which does allow larger files, but it's a proprietary
Microsoft format, there having been a few patent spats about Linux
devices using FAT32.

Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old 04-15-2012, 02:11 AM
Brian Gregory [UK]
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: C2-01 memory card

"Denis McMahon" <denismfmcmahon@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:4f86d2aa$0$2865$a8266bb1@newsreader.readnews. com...
> On Thu, 12 Apr 2012 00:15:34 +0100, Jake wrote:
>
>> "Denis McMahon" <denismfmcmahon@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:4f860daf$0$2822$a8266bb1@newsreader.readnews. com...
>>> On Tue, 10 Apr 2012 22:22:31 +0100, Jake wrote:
>>>
>>>> The documentation says it will take 16GB max. This will be a
>>>> microSDHC.
>>>>
>>>> Any good reason why it won't take 32GB?
>>>
>>> Proprietary card formatting? Crippled file handling implementation?
>>> Idiot writing the blurb?

>>
>> I was guessing at the time that they wrote the blurb when 16GB was the
>> largest available card you could buy.

>
> I thought that SDHC implied at least 32Gb ....


It might just be that 16GB was the biggest they tested with before release
or there might be a real reason that 16GB is the max.

Several years ago I had a camera that said 512MB was max allowed in it's
manual but I found it worked fine with 1GB and 2GB.

--

Brian Gregory. (In the UK)
ng@bgdsv.co.uk
To email me remove the letter vee.



Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old 04-15-2012, 02:13 AM
Brian Gregory [UK]
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: C2-01 memory card

"Roland Perry" <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote in message
news:V67c8vKEAxhPFAuk@perry.co.uk...
> In message <qb2eo7db9i2nnegr8srav24nqfvkkii80s@4ax.com>, at 18:06:06 on
> Thu, 12 Apr 2012, Anthony R. Gold <not-for-mail@ahjg.co.uk> remarked:
>>> And there can be other irritating restrictions. My Win7 laptop has an
>>> SDHC socket and works perfectly well with a 16GB card, until I tried to
>>> copy a 10GB file onto it the other day and was told "<the file> is too
>>> large for the destination file system".

>>
>>With which file system was the card formatted? FAT32 can only handle up to
>>4GB (minus one byte) per file. Did you try NTFS?

>
> That may be it. FAT32.
>
> By some freak chance, an earlier file on the card was 2Kb less than 4GB!!


Try exFAT.
It's more suited to flash memory that NTFS is.

--

Brian Gregory. (In the UK)
ng@bgdsv.co.uk
To email me remove the letter vee.



Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old 04-15-2012, 02:18 AM
Brian Gregory [UK]
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: C2-01 memory card

"Gordon Freeman" <Gordon@freeman.invalid> wrote in message
news:XnsA0358FCBAB364C9A7@127.0.0.1...
> "Anthony R. Gold" <not-for-mail@ahjg.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 12 Apr 2012 17:28:41 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> In message <l8ndo7l2k3shs2k5n80nd9hfqg7gcqi6s4@4ax.com>, at 14:54:02
>>> on Thu, 12 Apr 2012, Anthony R. Gold <not-for-mail@ahjg.co.uk>
>>> remarked:
>>>
>>>>> I thought that SDHC implied at least 32Gb ....
>>>>
>>>> No, at most. SDHC implies from 4GB minimum up to 32GB maximum.
>>>
>>> And there can be other irritating restrictions. My Win7 laptop has an
>>> SDHC socket and works perfectly well with a 16GB card, until I tried
>>> to copy a 10GB file onto it the other day and was told "<the file> is
>>> too large for the destination file system".

>>
>> With which file system was the card formatted? FAT32 can only handle
>> up to 4GB (minus one byte) per file. Did you try NTFS?

>
> I thought NTFS wasn't suitable for flash storage, since it continually
> writes to the device. That's presumably why Windows atill lets you
> format disks of up to 32GB as FAT32 despite Microsoft trying to enforce
> the use of NTFS on hard drives.
>
> For SDXC I believe a souped up variant of FAT32 has been created for
> cards of over 32GB, I wonder if this allows files of over 4GB, if not


I think it does.
It's called exFAT.
I think you can use it on smaller drives too.

> there would seem to be no reason not to use FAT32 for the bigger cards
> too, as long as you have a format utility that doesn't have Microsoft's
> arbitrary 32GB limit.


Indeed.
Until a few months ago I had an external USB2 500GB HD formatted as FAT32
for maximum compatibility with different OSs.

--

Brian Gregory. (In the UK)
ng@bgdsv.co.uk
To email me remove the letter vee.



Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old 04-15-2012, 02:20 AM
Brian Gregory [UK]
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: C2-01 memory card

"Andy Burns" <usenet.aug2009@adslpipe.co.uk> wrote in message
newsIydnf4VdYui4hTSnZ2dnUVZ8m6dnZ2d@brightview.c o.uk...
> Gordon Freeman wrote:
>
>> For SDXC I believe a souped up variant of FAT32 has been created for
>> cards of over 32GB, I wonder if this allows files of over 4GB

>
> There is exFAT which does allow larger files, but it's a proprietary
> Microsoft format, there having been a few patent spats about Linux devices
> using FAT32.


I think I read that Microsoft's FAT patents have now been proved invalid
with the help of Linus Torvalds.

--

Brian Gregory. (In the UK)
ng@bgdsv.co.uk
To email me remove the letter vee.



Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old 04-15-2012, 02:21 AM
Brian Gregory [UK]
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: C2-01 memory card

"Andy Burns" <usenet.aug2009@adslpipe.co.uk> wrote in message
news:8fydnbWLRb5MlhrSnZ2dnUVZ8sWdnZ2d@brightview.c o.uk...
> Roland Perry wrote:
>
>> Anthony R. Gold <not-for-mail@ahjg.co.uk> remarked:
>>
>>> SDHC implies from 4GB minimum up to 32GB maximum.

>>
>> And there can be other irritating restrictions. My Win7 laptop has an
>> SDHC socket and works perfectly well with a 16GB card, until I tried to
>> copy a 10GB file onto it the other day and was told "<the file> is too
>> large for the destination file system".

>
> But isn't that simply a FAT32 limitation, rather than SDHC?


Correct.

--

Brian Gregory. (In the UK)
ng@bgdsv.co.uk
To email me remove the letter vee.



Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old 04-15-2012, 08:33 AM
Andy Burns
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: C2-01 memory card

Brian Gregory [UK] wrote:

> I think I read that Microsoft's FAT patents have now been proved invalid
> with the help of Linus Torvalds.


I don't know whether the prior art has been "proved", TomTom certainly
coughed-up, but to my mind a reason to not get sucked into using exFAT.


Reply With Quote
  #16 (permalink)  
Old 04-15-2012, 08:42 AM
Andy Burns
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: C2-01 memory card

Brian Gregory [UK] wrote:

> "Gordon Freeman"<Gordon@freeman.invalid> wrote:
>
>> there would seem to be no reason not to use FAT32 for the bigger cards
>> too, as long as you have a format utility that doesn't have Microsoft's
>> arbitrary 32GB limit.


Informally referred to as FAT+ or FATPLUS
http://www.fdos.org/kernel/fatplus.txt

> Indeed.
> Until a few months ago I had an external USB2 500GB HD formatted as FAT32
> for maximum compatibility with different OSs.


No difficulties in practice with OS lack of FAT+ knowledge/support?


Reply With Quote
  #17 (permalink)  
Old 04-18-2012, 12:03 AM
David Woodhouse
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: C2-01 memory card

On Sun, 2012-04-15 at 02:20 +0100, Brian Gregory [UK] wrote:
> I think I read that Microsoft's FAT patents have now been proved invalid
> with the help of Linus Torvalds.


They were, but unfortunately nobody actually ended up in jail for the
fraud that they were trying to commit.

And now they're running an entirely new protection racket with a *new*
set of patents for exFAT.

I believe that, as usual, they aren't actually listing the specific
patents that they claim are relevant; it's just a shake-down for now.





Reply With Quote
  #18 (permalink)  
Old 06-30-2013, 03:55 PM
Brian Gregory [UK]
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: C2-01 memory card

"Andy Burns" <usenet.aug2009@adslpipe.co.uk> wrote in message
news:C6ednetisqyd4RfSnZ2dnUVZ7vSdnZ2d@brightview.c o.uk...
> Brian Gregory [UK] wrote:
>
>> "Gordon Freeman"<Gordon@freeman.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> there would seem to be no reason not to use FAT32 for the bigger cards
>>> too, as long as you have a format utility that doesn't have Microsoft's
>>> arbitrary 32GB limit.

>
> Informally referred to as FAT+ or FATPLUS
> http://www.fdos.org/kernel/fatplus.txt
>
>> Indeed.
>> Until a few months ago I had an external USB2 500GB HD formatted as FAT32
>> for maximum compatibility with different OSs.

>
> No difficulties in practice with OS lack of FAT+ knowledge/support?
>


I know I'm replying way way too late but...

No difficulties.

Until recently disks this large formatted as FAT32 were totally standard.
Microsoft just added the 32GB limit to their FAT32 formatting tools to try
and direct people towards using their proprietary exFAT and NTFS formats
that they get royalty payments from.

--

Brian Gregory. (In the UK)
ng@bgdsv.co.uk
To email me remove the letter vee.



Reply With Quote
Reply


« Bye bye Hangouts | Help with rooting and GAPPS »
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
a6200n Graphics Upgrade Axe alt.comp.hardware 3 03-05-2008 05:53 AM
Should I increase my PC's memory, too? Rollingstone06 alt.comp.hardware 4 12-02-2006 05:02 PM
Best fitting video card: NVIDIA (which brand?) or ATI (Sapphire)? Andrea Sansottera alt.comp.hardware 1 08-30-2006 10:12 AM
ASUS V9570 (Geforce FX 5700) - Overclocking/BIOS Flashing question Cronzor alt.comp.hardware 3 08-04-2006 08:37 PM


All times are GMT. The time now is 04:24 AM.



Powered by vBulletin® Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45