[Leica] Looking For Simple, Automated, Cross-Platform Back Up Solution....

[robertbaron1 at gmail.com (Robert Baron)]

Spencer, thanks for the explanations, but I need to ask for one more:
In this context, what is meant by / what is the practical effect of
the 2 TB 'volume' limitation of FAT32?

I know these are famous last words but I can't imagine needing a
partition (if that is synonymous with 'volume') any larger.

The reasons I have to deal with FAT32 are 1) I am moving image files
from a Windows environment to a Mac environment, and 2) I have to
retain the ability to go back.  If I was in an exclusively Mac
environment I wouldn't have these questions I understand, but I'm not
there yet.

--Bob

==On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 11:41 AM, Spencer Cheng <spencer at aotera.org> 
wrote:
> Bob,
>
> The reason that Time Machine doesn't work with FAT32 is complicated. The 
> short version is that Time Machine relies on the Mac's native file system 
> (HFS+) to keep track of what changed since the last backup. This is not 
> possible with non-HFS file systems. It the same reason that Windows backup 
> S/W doesn't usually work with HFS+ formatted disks. ;)
>
> I usually format all my external disks are formatted with HFS+ to avoid 
> this problem and I don't let Time Machine back up these disks.
>
> If my Mac breaks and I can't wait, I can borrow/beg/buy another Mac within 
> 24 hours. There are no advantages for me to keeping my external disks 
> formatted as FAT32.
>
> Be aware that FAT32 can NOT handle volumes bigger than 2TB.
>
> /sc
>