| Sysop: | Amessyroom |
|---|---|
| Location: | Fayetteville, NC |
| Users: | 23 |
| Nodes: | 6 (0 / 6) |
| Uptime: | 50:00:27 |
| Calls: | 583 |
| Files: | 1,138 |
| Messages: | 111,305 |
My Western Digital My Book external hard drive is formatted exFAT. I've
been using it for years. It has prior Acronis Backups on it, and other
data. The drive is formatted exPAT. I'd now like to use the drive to
image another hard drive, but I'd have to format the drive as NTFS to do
so.
Is it possible to (re)format the drive from exFAT to NTFS without
loosing the data that's already (i.e. the Acronis Backups, etc.) on it?
TIA
Boris <nospam@invalid.com> wrote in news:XnsB327ECE09BE6Anospaminvalidcom@157.180.91.226:
My Western Digital My Book external hard drive is formatted exFAT. I've
been using it for years. It has prior Acronis Backups on it, and other
data. The drive is formatted exPAT. I'd now like to use the drive to
image another hard drive, but I'd have to format the drive as NTFS to do
so.
Is it possible to (re)format the drive from exFAT to NTFS without
loosing the data that's already (i.e. the Acronis Backups, etc.) on it?
TIA
Or, do I simply move data out, to be safe, reformat to NTFS, and then move data back in?
My Western Digital My Book external hard drive is formatted exFAT. I've been using it for years. It has prior Acronis Backups on it, and other data. The drive is formatted exPAT. I'd now like to use the drive to image another hard drive, but I'd have to format the drive as NTFS to do so.
Is it possible to (re)format the drive from exFAT to NTFS without loosing the data that's already (i.e. the Acronis Backups, etc.) on it?
Boris <nospam@invalid.com> wrote in news:XnsB327ECE09BE6Anospaminvalidcom@157.180.91.226:
My Western Digital My Book external hard drive is formatted exFAT. I've
been using it for years. It has prior Acronis Backups on it, and other
data. The drive is formatted exPAT. I'd now like to use the drive to
image another hard drive, but I'd have to format the drive as NTFS to do
so.
Is it possible to (re)format the drive from exFAT to NTFS without
loosing the data that's already (i.e. the Acronis Backups, etc.) on it?
... but says he'd do that anyway. As, I think, would I.TIA
Or, do I simply move data out, to be safe, reformat to NTFS, and then move data back in?
On 26/07/2025 07:17, Boris wrote:
My Western Digital My Book external hard drive is formatted exFAT.-a I've been
using it for years.-a It has prior Acronis Backups on it, and other data.-a The
drive is formatted exPAT.-a I'd now like to use the drive to image another >> hard drive, but I'd have to format the drive as NTFS to do so.
Is it possible to (re)format the drive from exFAT to NTFS without loosing the
data that's already (i.e. the Acronis Backups, etc.) on it?
In a DOS / Command Prompt window,
convert d: /fs:ntfs
It is a one-way process: you can't convert NTFS back to FAT, FAT32 or exFAT.
I'd copy the data off to a second drive, because I'm cautious or even paranoid, and then try to convert the original drive and see what happens.
My Western Digital My Book external hard drive is formatted exFAT. I've been >using it for years. It has prior Acronis Backups on it, and other data. The >drive is formatted exPAT. I'd now like to use the drive to image another >hard drive, but I'd have to format the drive as NTFS to do so.
Is it possible to (re)format the drive from exFAT to NTFS without loosing the >data that's already (i.e. the Acronis Backups, etc.) on it?
TIA--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
The easiest way would be to highlight the drive and to pick "Format"Unless I'm very wrong, even quick format will *wipe all your data* as it
from the pop-up menu. The Windows Format command is pretty good. It is
also fast, if you do a "quick format".
But - before you do this - copy all of the data onto some other drive
just so it is safe. Quick formatting may preserve your data but if you
are careful or paranoid enough you won't want to chance that.
On Sat, 26 Jul 2025 06:17:09 -0000 (UTC), Boris <nospam@invalid.com>
wrote:
My Western Digital My Book external hard drive is formatted exFAT. I've been
using it for years. It has prior Acronis Backups on it, and other data. The
drive is formatted exPAT. I'd now like to use the drive to image another >> hard drive, but I'd have to format the drive as NTFS to do so.
Is it possible to (re)format the drive from exFAT to NTFS without loosing the
data that's already (i.e. the Acronis Backups, etc.) on it?
Yes, it is possible.
No, *I* would not trust any valuable data to such a process.
The easiest way would be to highlight the drive and to pick "Format"
from the pop-up menu. The Windows Format command is pretty good. It is
also fast, if you do a "quick format".
But - before you do this - copy all of the data onto some other drive
just so it is safe. Quick formatting may preserve your data but if you
are careful or paranoid enough you won't want to chance that.
Also, the Format command inside Windows says that it *can* convert
NTFS back into exFAT but I've never tried that one.
format /?Formats a disk for use with Windows.
On 26/07/2025 21:31, John wrote:
-a The easiest way would be to highlight the drive and to pick "Format"
from the pop-up menu. The Windows Format command is pretty good. It is
also fast, if you do a "quick format".
-a But - before you do this - copy all of the data onto some other drive
just so it is safe. Quick formatting may preserve your data but if you
are careful or paranoid enough you won't want to chance that.
Unless I'm very wrong, even quick format will *wipe all your data* as
it is formatting the drive. So you *must* copy all the data off to a
second drive first. And maybe check that it is a good copy.
On 2025/7/26 7:32:6, Boris wrote:
Boris <nospam@invalid.com> wrote in
news:XnsB327ECE09BE6Anospaminvalidcom@157.180.91.226:
My Western Digital My Book external hard drive is formatted exFAT. I've >>> been using it for years. It has prior Acronis Backups on it, and other
data. The drive is formatted exPAT. I'd now like to use the drive to
image another hard drive, but I'd have to format the drive as NTFS to do >>> so.
Assuming you mean by "image" what I mean by image, then do you need to change anything at all? By "image", I mean make in effect a giant zip
file, representing the contents of a drive, partition, or combination thereof, which can be restored in the event of disaster (drive failure, ransomware, or just real screwup).
The only reason I could think of that you might need to reformat -
assuming you _do_ mean the same as me by the word "image" - is that NTFS allows larger files than exFAT (or exPAT!).
case. (I have vague memories that one of the systems around, has a file
size limit of 2 or 4 G.) Macrium, which I use for imaging, isn't
troubled by that - if it needs to make an image bigger than the file
systen on the target drive can handle, it just makes a multi-file image; YMMV.>>
Is it possible to (re)format the drive from exFAT to NTFS without
loosing the data that's already (i.e. the Acronis Backups, etc.) on it?
NY has given a command line method ...>>
... but says he'd do that anyway. As, I think, would I.TIA
Or, do I simply move data out, to be safe, reformat to NTFS, and then move >> data back in?
"J. P. Gilliver" <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote in news:1062pda$2ehh0$5@dont- email.me:
Or, do I simply move data out, to be safe, reformat to NTFS, and then move >>> data back in?... but says he'd do that anyway. As, I think, would I.
Macrium is better at backups than the "Windows 7 Backup" is, I think
it's a good thing you did a backup with the Macrium instead. The Macrium
has a "Verify" function, whereas I don't think the Microsoft "Windows 7 Backup"
has a Verify function. I've not seen any mention of the features you would expect from a commercial backup, in the Microsoft one.
Similarly, if you did a 7Z compression, there is a Verify function for
that too (it just verifies the checksum).
Macrium, they made a claim they have a repair capability, for their big backup
file, but I have not seen mention of anyone using that.
Maybe Santa Claus will buy you a bigger backup drive :-)
Then you can put NTFS on it.
Paul
On 2025/7/28 4:3:47, Paul wrote:
[]
Macrium is better at backups than the "Windows 7 Backup" is, I think
it's a good thing you did a backup with the Macrium instead. The Macrium
Also, I don't _think_ it's bothered about what the target drive is
formatted as (if it's one with a smaller filesize limit than needed, it
just makes a multi-file image); from what Boris was saying, sounds like
the W7 backup thing will only image to NTFS. (Or maybe needed the file
size, if that's bigger on NTFS.)
has a "Verify" function, whereas I don't think the Microsoft "Windows 7 Backup"
has a Verify function. I've not seen any mention of the features you would >> expect from a commercial backup, in the Microsoft one.
Similarly, if you did a 7Z compression, there is a Verify function for
that too (it just verifies the checksum).
Macrium, they made a claim they have a repair capability, for their big backup
file, but I have not seen mention of anyone using that.
I'm not sure if what the W7 backup system produces is bootable; to do a
"cold metal" restore from a Macrium image, you do need a Macrium boot
device (M5 and M6 will fit on a mini-CD, and are fine for W7 systems;
later versions of W10 need later Macrium, though I'm not sure which. M8
needs a DVD, though I think would still fit on a mini one.)>
Maybe Santa Claus will buy you a bigger backup drive :-)
Then you can put NTFS on it.
On Mon, 7/28/2025 1:13 AM, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
On 2025/7/28 4:3:47, Paul wrote:
[]
Macrium is better at backups than the "Windows 7 Backup" is, I think
it's a good thing you did a backup with the Macrium instead. The Macrium
I'm not sure if what the W7 backup system produces is bootable; to do a
The ExFAT as a file system, should be perfectly functional as far as
storage goes. It doesn't have a 4GB limitation on files like FAT32.
That is presumably one of the design objectives of making a new
file system, was removing that limitation.
But it is not a journaled file system as far as I know (could be corrupted
by your random unplugging of it). And it's not an attempt to match all the capabilities of NTFS either. It's a unique filesystem, likely intended for external flash storage (like a USB stick or a camera system or something).
If your external drive is a HDD, with no discernible "wear issue", there
is hardly a reason to be using ExFAT on that. One of the intents of ExFAT,
is less write-wear on the flash (because it is not journaled).
I've formatted things a couple times with ExFAT, and it just seems soon after, I'm putting NTFS on the same storage device later. And not being
able to shrink/expand it, even with third party tools (if one works doing that), that puts a damper on the fun. If you could shrink the ExFAT partition,
you could create an NTFS partition in the space that is freed up.
Some of the OS functions, if you believe the Microsoft documentation,
they have "an NTFS requirement", yet you can find examples of third-party coding attempts that seem to get by without meeting that. There have
been things, where NTFS as a mount point was claimed to be a requirement,
and a third party managed to get it running on FAT32.
The "Windows 7 backup on Windows 7" is VHD based, with a 2.2TB limitation. That's the difference between VHD and VHDX files, is VHDX allows a much larger
container to be constructed than the 2.2TB limit. It could be, that the "thing"
being backed up has to be NTFS (maybe having something to do with applying
a VSS shadow to C: when backing it up). But the output file system, there really should not be a big deal writing out a VHD. It's just a file. It can be configured as a dynamically expanding container, so you don't have to pre-allocate storage for it. That's one of the reasons I like it.
I can emulate a 500TB container with some of the dynamically expanding containers, and the thing might take less than 1GB of storage when it is empty. That allows me to take pictures of absurdly large storage, without actually owning that much storage. In theory, you should be able to make
a container larger than that, but that's roughly the practical limit
(for taking pictures of it in disk management at least).
One of the disadvantages of large HDD, is needing yet another large HDD
to offload it. But you can't run computers in a vacuum, so once you have storage at home, you also need the tools for doing the maintenance of it.
And unloading a device, while doing maintenance on it, is a degree of
freedom you need for practical usage.
Like the person who keeps asking questions about "the practical running
of a hard drive which is full of CRC errors". Well, don't do that.
Or, get another hobby. We're not on Mars here, and we're not trying to
grow a potato in the wrong kind of soil. Or making fuel out of the
Martian ice caps. Just find another drive, even a used one, that doesn't
have CRC errors, and use that. Running a drive with CRC errors would be fine... if the CRC errors did not move, or if the situation was "stable".
But having additional CRC errors show up randomly with time, you would
be spending more time on disk maintenance, than getting anything done.
That's why I retire drives that have shown their true colors (like the
five or six Seagate 500GB drives that exhibited some really weird
performance issues, and some day, when I open those up, I know I'm
going to find there is no plastic landing ramp for the heads inside those).
Paul
(You have forgotten far more on this subject than I ever knew.)
The ExFAT as a file system, should be perfectly functional as far as
storage goes. It doesn't have a 4GB limitation on files like FAT32.
That is presumably one of the design objectives of making a new
file system, was removing that limitation.
(Oh: the two partitions on my SSD here are NTFS. Does that mean it's
wearing at twice the rate, because of the journalling? [Currently
showing as 97%, "good", in Crystal.])>
"Everything" (the voidtools utility) alone justifies, for me, using
NTFS; I use Everything a lot, and although it does work on FAT (I forget which one), it's _far_ slower. I presume it works as fast as it does _because_ it uses the journalling in some way.
In much the same way that the built-in (from W7 I think) partition
manager is unable to shrink partitions beyond a point (usually when it
gets to certain system files, I think), whereas external ones like the
EaseUS one can (I presume by moving said files).
The only time I've ever opened one up was - in a laptop prone to
overheating - it had spot-welded a head or something: it just stopped spinning that day. Though I was able to free it (and retrieve lots -
95-97%, I think - of what was on it), I definitely considered it as
scrap, and this seemed justified: even though I'd opened it in a positive-pressure clean cabinet I had access to at work, every time I
checked it after that, it had more errors.
The ExFAT as a file system, should be perfectly functional as far as
storage goes. It doesn't have a 4GB limitation on files like FAT32.
That is presumably one of the design objectives of making a new
file system, was removing that limitation.
But it is not a journaled file system as far as I know (could be corrupted
by your random unplugging of it). And it's not an attempt to match all the capabilities of NTFS either. It's a unique filesystem, likely intended for external flash storage (like a USB stick or a camera system or something).
If your external drive is a HDD, with no discernible "wear issue", there
is hardly a reason to be using ExFAT on that. One of the intents of ExFAT,
is less write-wear on the flash (because it is not journaled).
On Sun, 7/27/2025 10:11 PM, Boris wrote:
"J. P. Gilliver" <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote in news:1062pda$2ehh0$5@dont-
email.me:
Or, do I simply move data out, to be safe, reformat to NTFS, and then... but says he'd do that anyway. As, I think, would I.
move data back in?
The individual files sitting on the MyBook, are they compressed at all ? (like, compressed by Acronis True Image).
On modern file sets, you don't always get that much improvement in size,
but it would be a way of requiring less space for your archive files.
On Macrium, I back up in an uncompressed state, then use 7ZIP to make .mrimg.7z from the files and 7ZIP can compress files pretty well.
One problem with compressing files this time of year, it running 100% on
all cores makes the room warm. Compressing files in winter, well, throw another log on the fire.
There was an article a few weeks ago, mentioning the latest version
of 7ZIP now allows more CPU cores to be used (core groups, like on
Win11 Workstation). That means, for only $11,000 or so, your compression operation could go faster. I think I'd rather have a small used car
instead :-)
*******
Macrium is better at backups than the "Windows 7 Backup" is, I think
it's a good thing you did a backup with the Macrium instead. The Macrium
has a "Verify" function, whereas I don't think the Microsoft "Windows 7 Backup" has a Verify function. I've not seen any mention of the features
you would expect from a commercial backup, in the Microsoft one.
Similarly, if you did a 7Z compression, there is a Verify function for
that too (it just verifies the checksum).
Macrium, they made a claim they have a repair capability, for their big backup file, but I have not seen mention of anyone using that.
Maybe Santa Claus will buy you a bigger backup drive :-)
Then you can put NTFS on it.
Paul
On 28/07/2025 10:43, Paul wrote:
The ExFAT as a file system, should be perfectly functional as far as
storage goes. It doesn't have a 4GB limitation on files like FAT32.
That is presumably one of the design objectives of making a new
file system, was removing that limitation.
But it is not a journaled file system as far as I know (could be corrupted >> by your random unplugging of it). And it's not an attempt to match all the >> capabilities of NTFS either. It's a unique filesystem, likely intended for >> external flash storage (like a USB stick or a camera system or something). >> If your external drive is a HDD, with no discernible "wear issue", there
is hardly a reason to be using ExFAT on that. One of the intents of ExFAT, >> is less write-wear on the flash (because it is not journaled).
I think an advantage of exFAT over NTFS is that it is often readable by devices (eg DVD/HDD TV recorders with ability to plug in a memory stick) because it is FAT-like, even if they can't read NTFS. It has the advantage over FAT/FAT32 that is doesn't have the cursed 4GB file size limit.
Once interesting aside... I understand that a lot of devices such as HDD recorders and digital cameras can't read/write NTFS because they would need to pay a licence fee to Microsoft. And yet Debian/Raspbian distros of Linux include NTFS capability, for writing as well as reading, without needing to pass on a Microsoft fee to punters. And it works: my Raspberry Pi which records TV programmes to an external (spinning) HDD uses an NTFS rather than Unix-specific filesystem so I can unplug the disk and read it on Windows if required.