this post was submitted on 03 Mar 2025
261 points (97.8% liked)

memes

12193 readers
1999 users here now

Community rules

1. Be civilNo trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour

2. No politicsThis is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world

3. No recent repostsCheck for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month

4. No botsNo bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins

5. No Spam/AdsNo advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live.

A collection of some classic Lemmy memes for your enjoyment

Sister communities

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 33 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 2 points 34 minutes ago
[–] ramble81@lemm.ee 19 points 2 hours ago (2 children)

Wait, people use thumb drives with whatever formatting was on it when they ripped open the box? Next you’re gonna tell me people pick up random usb sticks off the ground and plug it in to their computer….

[–] ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 hour ago

That is the best way to hack a company

Bonus points if you make the .pdf have to be moved off the thumb drive to open

[–] SkyezOpen@lemmy.world 16 points 2 hours ago

If you're cold they're cold. Plug them in and warm them up.

[–] HeyJoe@lemmy.world 15 points 3 hours ago

It may have a lot to do with licensing royalties. Exfat was created by Microsoft and is licensed for use. So why increase the cost of the device when you can just ship it with the older system that costs nothing.

https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/legal/intellectualproperty/tech-licensing/programs#exfat

[–] 9point6@lemmy.world 23 points 5 hours ago (3 children)

Literally everything with USB can read FAT32, there's some old or incredibly simple stuff out there that doesn't read exFAT.

Manufacturers ideally want to spend as little as possible handling support for users, so they go with the option that isn't going to result in returns from people who think it doesn't work with their old printer or whatever.

[–] prembil@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

Updated some recent Gigabyte mini-pc using EFI shell the other month. I had to have a USB flash drive with FAT32

[–] Trainguyrom@reddthat.com 2 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

I have a client that does HVAC work who needed help preparing a 128GB flash drive for loading firmware onto high end thermostats. Quickly ran the command to format as FAT32 because that's what the thermostats require (and he indicated the firmware files would exceed the 32GB limit in the GUI)

[–] prembil@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 46 minutes ago

Are you formatting it using the windows disk manager? Any 3rd party tool will allow you to go above the 32GB limit.

[–] tiredofsametab@fedia.io 2 points 3 hours ago

I've had smart TVs that only updates with fat32 formatted USBs for firmware, for a concrete example.

[–] scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech 2 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

Plus exfat has a LOT of caveats. Like no linking....

[–] Natanox@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 3 hours ago

Could make it f2fs, but I'd bet Windows doesn't support that.

[–] dual_sport_dork@lemmy.world 54 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago) (1 children)

You can format a flash drive with whatever the hell file system you want. Just, don't expect anything formatted exFAT to work in any dedicated device made before 2019, nor even the majority of them made afterwards.

The ones who need to get their shit together are the manufacturers of printers, media players, car head units, set top boxes, game consoles, and all the other things into which you might want to insert a flash drive (or memory card) that is not a full-blown PC.

[–] FeelzGoodMan420@eviltoast.org 10 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago)

What's wrong with exfat? I've used it dozens of time with no problems.

Edit: oh thought you meant wth pcs. You mean cars and receivers and stuff. Fair.

[–] knobbysideup@sh.itjust.works 18 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago)

It's not like formatting it to another filesystem is remotely difficult. Hell you could even make multiple partitions and a software raid, LVM, whatever.

If you need a different filesystem, then do that.

[–] slazer2au@lemmy.world 35 points 9 hours ago (1 children)
[–] cm0002@lemmy.world 8 points 8 hours ago (2 children)

exFAT is fully compatible with all modern OSs and any device running a somewhat modern Linux kernel

[–] jim3692@discuss.online 18 points 7 hours ago

The keyword here is "modern". Some people use older hardware, like DVRs with ancient firmwares.

Most people, nowadays, use cloud services instead of USB sticks, so I guess it's preferred to focus on supporting legacy devices.

The real problem may be external hard drives. Those are commonly used by media creators. Unless they know that they should format to exFAT when buying, they will learn it when it's way too late.

I may be on the later category. It was ~15 years ago, and little Jimmy (me) got his first external hard drive. However, he didn't know about formats, and that he couldn't copy 4.5GB movies to his new toy.

Back then, it was either 4GB file size limit (FAT32), or it only works on one platform (NTFS, ext2, whatever Apple was using, ...)

[–] AnAustralianPhotographer@lemmy.world 23 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago)

I think they mean compatibility with old devices like 5-10 year old handheld devices that don't get updates.

There was a period where very early digital cameras (think 1.2 megapixels) could only read up to 4 gigabyte memory cards, so camera stores had a stock of smaller cards for when people came in with 'old faithful' and couldn't get the 8, 16 and 32 gig cards working with it.

I'm not sure companies want to risk a corrupted card killing all of. 2 hour recording where the practice of splitting into 4gig chunks for later reconstruction might mean only the latest 15-29 minutes of a recording is lost if corrupted.

[–] GooberEar@lemmy.wtf 3 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

Why can't they just make one universal standard format and then just stick to that in all systems rather than have 400 million random different incompatible file systems running around? Wouldn't 400 million and 1 be better?

[–] passepartout@feddit.org 18 points 9 hours ago (2 children)

Recently tried to make a printer scan a file to an exFAT formatted thumb drive, didn't go well. Then tried moving a file from a windows to a linux machine using another exFAT formatted thumb drive, still no luck lol.

[–] mmddmm@lemm.ee 14 points 9 hours ago (2 children)

I get the impression that ext4 is more widely supported than exFAT.

[–] cm0002@lemmy.world 14 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago)

Lol nah, exFAT is the only current FS (other than fat32) capable of being read AND written to by Linux, MacOS and Windows out of the box

[–] 30p87@feddit.org 5 points 8 hours ago

It certainly should be. And as we're on it, Mainboards should support it too. It's a pain to create special partitions, and sometimes even use MBR instead of GPT, just for a BIOS update.

[–] bamboo@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 8 hours ago

I pushed a friend to format an external hard drive with exFAT and not Apple's filesystem for compability, but something with the M2 MacBook eventually messed up the filesystem and it couldn't read it. Troubleshooting and reading forums, found there's something with the new Macs and exFAT. Ended up having to use an x86 apple device to recover the data.

[–] MrScottyTay@sh.itjust.works 8 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

With it being formatted as fat32 by default it means you can format it to whatever you want however you want when you get it.

[–] cm0002@lemmy.world 9 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

...but....that's true of all FS's lol

[–] MrScottyTay@sh.itjust.works 4 points 7 hours ago

Is it the case with window xp etc. because it's legacy systems (no matter how long ago their EOL was) that makes them do this sort of stuff

[–] atro_city@fedia.io 3 points 8 hours ago (3 children)

Ironic that it's called "fat32"

[–] letsgo@lemm.ee 15 points 7 hours ago

Why? FAT=File Allocation Table, 32 refers to 32-bit, for which the maximum is 4,294,967,295, hence the 4GB limit.

[–] semperverus@lemmy.world 10 points 7 hours ago

32 bit width for values

[–] DmMacniel@feddit.org 6 points 7 hours ago

what's ironic about it?