Hacking Switch supports fat 32 micro sd cards

[JimmyZ]

but you can't have a file bigger than 4GB in fat32, in the switch maybe it's not usefull but in normal devices it's really usefull.....

If you need that I'd recommend NTFS instead, compatibility is better.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

Oh god please let this be sarcasm D:

Unfortunately it's not.

 

[DarkIrata]

If you need that I'd recommend NTFS instead, compatibility is better.

exFat is one of the best formats... it support file sizes up to exabyte.
There are reasons why linux use ext formats. It supports much more than NTFS.

 

[JimmyZ]

exFat is one of the best formats... it support file sizes up to exabyte.
There are reasons why linux use ext formats. It supports much more than NTFS.

You're joking right?

 

[DarkIrata]

You're joking right?

tell me a few arguments why ntfs is better?

 

[JimmyZ]

tell me a few arguments why ntfs is better?

exFAT has nothing to do with Linux ext file system.

 

[GerbilSoft]

tell me a few arguments why ntfs is better?

The issue isn't necessarily that NTFS is better, but that exFAT has absolutely nothing to do with Linux ext2/ext3/ext4.

EDIT: 2slow, again. :V

 

[TeamScriptKiddies]

The issue isn't necessarily that NTFS is better, but that exFAT has absolutely nothing to do with Linux ext2/ext3/ext4.

EDIT: 2slow, again. :V

The benefit of exFATis it works with Linux, MacOS and Windows without needing to be reformatted, it's universal.

 

[spotanjo3]

This just in: Switch supports 120V outlets.

Still trying to find out if the system is compatible with human hands. Will keep you posted.

Actually, Nintendo Switch is a 100-240 or 250 dual voltages. You can buy it in Europe or in America and go anywhere you want. Just use the correct Power plug or an adapter.

 

[The Catboy]

Wow~ You mean Nintendo continues to support a common system?
Seriously, did you really need to waste more of the server space to make another thread?

 

[urherenow]

SDXC is identical to SDHC except cosmetic differences.

No one supports/wants/needs exfat, FAT32 can support up to 32TB volumes, except Microsoft.

hate to burst your bubble, but fat32 can only manage just about 8Tb. Max file size is 4GB -1byte.

 

[nolimits59]

Wow~ You mean Nintendo continues to support a common system?
Seriously, did you really need to waste more of the server space to make another thread?

I hope someone will test the touchscreen to see if it's compatible with tiny fingers also, it's a question everybody NEEDS ANSWER !

 

[JimmyZ]

hate to burst your bubble, but fat32 can only manage just about 8Tb. The End.

Citation needed, well I misread too, it's 16TB. Anyway, it should suffice in the lifespan of Switch.

The real issue is Microsoft limit FAT32 to 32GB on Windows, it doesn't allow you to format a volume bigger than 32GB to FAT32 but can read it if formated by other tools, just to force users to turn to the more patent protected exFAT. SDXC is said to be used together with exFAT, this is the only specification difference, but most devices just use them in FAT32 instead.

The benefit of exFATis it works with Linux, MacOS and Windows without needing to be reformatted, it's universal.

No there is no widely adopted exFAT implementation for Linux, because of patent and license issues.

It's sad there is no such thing as a perfect universal file system, while FAT32, with certain flaws, is the only candidate. And nobody seems to be interested to solve that.

 

[tunip3]

no

Wow~ You mean Nintendo continues to support a common system?
Seriously, did you really need to waste more of the server space to make another thread?

i just thought that they would have used device specific drive encryption like on wii u and i could not find this documented anywhere online.

 

[The Catboy]

Citation needed, well I misread too, it's 16TB. Anyway, it should suffice in the lifespan of Switch.

The real issue is Microsoft limit FAT32 to 32GB on Windows, it doesn't allow you to format a volume bigger than 32GB to FAT32 but can read it if formated by other tools, just to force users to turn to the more patent protected exFAT. SDXC is said to be used together with exFAT, this is the only specification difference, but most devices just use them in FAT32 instead.


No there is no widely adopted exFAT implementation for Linux, because of patent and license issues.

It's sad there is no such thing as a perfect universal file system, while FAT32, with certain flaws, is the only candidate. And nobody seems to be interested to solve that.

I am using 64GB SD Card formatted with to exFAT right now on Linux. Linux has supported exFAT for quite some time now.

no

i just thought that they would have used device specific drive encryption like on wii u and i could not find this documented anywhere online.

It's really not covered because it's both not a big deal and was kind of expected/common knowledge at this point. Even if it didn't and used it's own setup, it wouldn't be that big a deal.

 

[GerbilSoft]

no

i just thought that they would have used device specific drive encryption like on wii u and i could not find this documented anywhere online.

They can't use a custom file system because the SD license agreement mandates the particular file systems. (FAT32 for SDHC, exFAT for SDXC)

The Switch's own directory on the SD card, like on 3DS, is encrypted using a per-console key. IIRC there's still no way to read the contents of the "Nintendo 3DS" directories if you don't have the original system. (This will change once the protected ARM9 BootROM is dumped.)

 

[urherenow]

Citation needed,

Citation? It's called math. The maximum possible number of clusters on a FAT32 volume is 268,435,445, and there is a maximum of 32 KB per cluster (some software will throw-up when trying to calculate free space on fat32 with 64kb clusters or larger), along with the space required for the file allocation table (FAT). That's just about 8 TB (not exactly). I know of no tool that does more than 2TB though.

 

[JimmyZ]

Citation? It's called math. The maximum possible number of clusters on a FAT32 volume is 268,435,445, and there is a maximum of 32 KB per cluster (some software will throw-up when trying to calculate free space on fat32 with 64kb clusters or larger), along with the space required for the file allocation table (FAT). That's just about 8 TB (not exactly). I know of no tool that does more than 2TB though.

That's the kind of maximum you're talking about.

Anyway, 16TB or 8TB or 2TB, either should be sufficient for Switch's lifespan, the point is, if Nintendo want to claim SDXC support, they must support exFAT, that's the ugly business Microsoft has done.

 

[GerbilSoft]

exFAT's only major issue is patents. This is part of the reason why it hasn't been implemented in the Linux kernel. There is a FUSE filesystem available, though.

Aside from that, it has some nice features that are missing from FAT32:

• Support for files larger than 4 GB.
• Optimization for contiguous files by marking them as contiguous. This reduces the need to access the FAT when walking through the cluster chain.
• Checksums in various areas to reduce issues caused by data corruption.
• Create and Modified times have 10ms timestamp granularity, and Access times have 2s granularity. (previously only a modified time was standard, with 2s granularity)
• Support for UTC timestamps as of Vista SP2. (NTFS, ext4, and most other file systems other than FAT16/32 use UTC internally.)

 

[APartOfMe]

apparently you can put the switch into the dock and it will play on the tv!

 

[DarthDub]

Why is everyone talking about TBs when there is only a prototype 1 TB microsd card that isn't even out yet? You guys are silly.