I never had a spin down, on any of my WD my books, NEW OR OLD , and i was playing mario for 3 hours with 249 today , no spindown, last week was playing the same game with 222 ver and No spindown on my harddrive , i think its your harddrive then..
I'll give you one, forwarder iso's don't work on 249 but do on 222. So if you are like me and run forward iso to launch the system menu or any other homebrew that may not be a channel and you want to use these forwarders then you need 222.
As for the fat32 debate, I now agree with Miigotu on this 100%. I use the default fat32 coverter that oggzy created and coverted all my wbfs games. All worked first time shot with no issues. I had 276 games and it did not take that long to covert. I let it copy all games over to hard drive over night so I didn't have to wait. Easiest switch I ever made.
One more thing, since all games are packed into wbfs containers per say they will function exactly like they did on the wbfs partition. So there will be really no difference except you will be able to manage easier and can have just one partition.
As for the fat32 debate, I now agree with Miigotu on this 100%. I use the default fat32 coverter that oggzy created and coverted all my wbfs games. All worked first time shot with no issues. I had 276 games and it did not take that long to covert. I let it copy all games over to hard drive over night so I didn't have to wait. Easiest switch I ever made.
One more thing, since all games are packed into wbfs containers per say they will function exactly like they did on the wbfs partition. So there will be really no difference except you will be able to manage easier and can have just one partition.
TeenTin said:
The bottom line is, if you're an old school guy you usually know wth you're doing with wiiflow and how to set things up and whatnot. You wouldnt be spamming a question that has been answered 500 times already. And for you wbfs is fine if you choose it. But giving advice to new users to use that file system is not at all wise. Especially when we have to deal with things like ppl not telling them to put their fat32 partition first and wbfs last, or to put data_on_usb=no in their wiiflow.ini to run wiiflow from full SD.
This kind of misinformation to newcomers is why we continually have to answer these questions. If you were starting fresh and had nothing to lose, could you honestly tell me you would choose wbfs over fat32? I bet not, which by definition proves it obsolete, and if you would then I guess you shouldnt be giving anyone advice.
imho wbfs should only be continued to be used if ppl have no other option or means to switch over.
EDIT: hell I could have stayed using WMP 5.1 if i chose to, but it is still obsolete. In some SPECIFIC circumstances 222 may be better for a person or two who has a shitty drive, but not in the general body of users.
mgrimmenator said:
Usually you would have more games than forwarder isos. Simply set the ios to boot them from to 222. Also I think they work with cios249 r20 too.
I heard that WBFS is the most stable...thats why i chose it, but its time to switch to fat32 i guess...I hope r20 comes out soon so i can see what the potential is of this cios...mugotu said:
Searching would help sometimes...these questions have been asked over and over...ipawii said:
Either Wanins rev19 or Hermes cIOS (r4 or r5) will do the job. For the instrument games, you need to install one cIOS with Base 37, and set WiiFlow to use it (Game Settings).
This situation is exactly why I posted the rant about ppl giving false advice. Etheboss, you first used wiiflow what 2 weeks ago? Now because someone misinformed you you have to waste more of your life to switch if you want the added usability of fat32.Pakatus said:
mugotu said:
i hope your not pointing fingers here, if so then i havent gave false advice or any advice of the sort just a fact that WBFS isnt obsolete but getting out dated. Your misinforming newer users saying they must use FAT32 because oh "WBFS is obsolete and no body uses it", when the fact is if the user wants to user a file system they prefer when why try and stop them, try before you buy i say, if they dont like it they can switch. if WBFS way so obsolete why is it every loader supported it first before FAT32, why not just go straight FAT32, whey the need to make a dedicated FS, if it wasnt for oggzee no one would have their games on a FAT32 partition and this step was only done a few months ago yet WBFS has been used since USB loading was accomplished
Its like saying no need for legs they are obsolete because you can sit on your arse and drive about, no need for walking these days
come on each system will entice different users, can we stop the agro about which is better for what purposes, simple fact is FAT32 is YOUR preferred FS meaning its YOUR opinion and opinions dont have to be taken like wise for me not that im a WBFS fanman or anything as i do have my top games on FAT32(15-20) not that its as many as whats on the WBFS partition
yawn, fat32 is better than wbfs. Anyone who is not an idiot knows this. Someone advised him that wbfs is best and he picked it, now he wants to switch since someone didnt give him all the details. If ppl are going to give advice on what file system to use, give them COMPLETE information. I got the shits of ppl complaining about wbfs problems and asking help to switch to fat32 once they learn its advantages.
In Etheboss' case, he would have never chosen wbfs from the beginning if he was informed of the ups and downs of both file systems.
This argument isnt even about filesystems anymore. First it was about that wbfs is not obsolete now its about proving you're right. Ppl who want to be hard-headed rather than accept the truth by all means keep using wbfs. But for those of us who want the best option available, we will use fat32.
In the case of software and computing, once something comes out that is BETTER than the thing before it, the previous thing is indeed obsolete.
For you to take the whole point i was making about wbfs as a personal attack is seriously juvenile. The original point i made is for EVERYONE to stop telling ppl wbfs is best, this is not wiiflow 1.1 anymore. And I made that point by stating facts about wiiflow 2.0+. As one of the major developers of this app I think I would know which is best. Between dev svn and wiiflow svn i have 82+ commits. I dont speak here as a purpose to serve 1 person, only to make sure proper information is given.
as for your metaphor, wbfs is more like crawling, fat32 is like we learned how to walk. Crawl as long as you like.
In Etheboss' case, he would have never chosen wbfs from the beginning if he was informed of the ups and downs of both file systems.
This argument isnt even about filesystems anymore. First it was about that wbfs is not obsolete now its about proving you're right. Ppl who want to be hard-headed rather than accept the truth by all means keep using wbfs. But for those of us who want the best option available, we will use fat32.
In the case of software and computing, once something comes out that is BETTER than the thing before it, the previous thing is indeed obsolete.
For you to take the whole point i was making about wbfs as a personal attack is seriously juvenile. The original point i made is for EVERYONE to stop telling ppl wbfs is best, this is not wiiflow 1.1 anymore. And I made that point by stating facts about wiiflow 2.0+. As one of the major developers of this app I think I would know which is best. Between dev svn and wiiflow svn i have 82+ commits. I dont speak here as a purpose to serve 1 person, only to make sure proper information is given.
as for your metaphor, wbfs is more like crawling, fat32 is like we learned how to walk. Crawl as long as you like.
Not to get in between this discussion, but i second Miigotu in his remark about knowing all the facts, given that, i would have chosen for the most stable and easy filesystem (but i don't know exactly from which rev. FAT32 was supported) when i started using Wiiflow, or i have switched sooner, but the info i got was not unambiguous.mugotu said:
Similar threads
-
- Portal
-
-
-
-
-
-
@
Psionic Roshambo:
The only CoD game I played that I truly enjoyed was Black Ops 1, and only the single player game. I just found the plot pretty interesting. -
-
-
-
@
Psionic Roshambo:
I think if I was making a list Modern Warfare 1 would be my second place spot, with stopping a crazed terrorist from starting world war three and all.+1
-
@
Psionic Roshambo:
I really didn't like playing online against other people always felt like I was being matched against children... Sorry it's your 7th birthday but I guess I'm supposed to mow you down anyway...
-
@
Psionic Roshambo:
I have reflexes a cat would be jealous of and a near psychic ability to read people, makes online play feel incredibly unfair. Ironically I have been booted from online servers for being a bot.... Or aim assist lol
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
s