Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
windows are still ahead
- Thread starter zoran
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
…uh… What?
For one, it's obvious that Windows has the majority of the market — like 85% or more. So, if you were the maker of a TV, which one would you choose?
Secondly, who really cares? A format is a format. Look at what iPods and iTunes did for the world — AAC has become so popular, that even Sony (who used proprietary codecs for years) submitted to its use in their music players and devices. It's the same for hard drives, FAT32 is just a format. It's the most popular — just like how AAC (which Apple really pushed) is now the most popular.
For one, it's obvious that Windows has the majority of the market — like 85% or more. So, if you were the maker of a TV, which one would you choose?
Secondly, who really cares? A format is a format. Look at what iPods and iTunes did for the world — AAC has become so popular, that even Sony (who used proprietary codecs for years) submitted to its use in their music players and devices. It's the same for hard drives, FAT32 is just a format. It's the most popular — just like how AAC (which Apple really pushed) is now the most popular.
yeah but if Fat32 is used you cant put a larger than 4gb mkv video file to watch on tv, so there is a downside compared to HFS or NTFS for that matter!
Because FAT32 uses a 32-bit field to hold the cluster values, which makes the maximum file size 2^32 - 1 bytes, which results in a maximum file size of 4GiB.
OP, what about NTFS? You can write to NTFS formatted volumes via MacFuse and NTFS-3G.
Also Windows is a singular in relation to Microsoft's name for its OS, therefore "are" is wrong.
And concluding that Windows is still ahead from a drive formatting issue is quite out there, but as you didn't state in what terms it was ahead, one can overlook the world wild wet way of wording.
The manufacturer only does what is more convenient to him, so since Windows are still ahead he would choose fat32
The manufacturer only does what is more convenient to him, so since Windows are still ahead he would choose fat32
Actually, since NTFS is more current, and required for both Windows Vista and Win7, a smart manufacturer would choose NTFS over FAT32. Besides silly reasons like the 4GB file limit.
The manufacturer only does what is more convenient to him, so since Windows are still ahead he would choose fat32
Ahead of what is Windows are?
FAT32 could also be the lowest common denominator.... best for consumerist people.
Something I posted on AI a while ago.
Apple made 8.34 billion USD in revenue in the 3rd quarter of 2009, with a profit of 1.23 billion USD. http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2009/07/21results.html
Microsoft made 13.099 billion USD of revenue in the same quarter of 2009 and had a profit of 3.045 billion USD. http://www.microsoft.com/msft/earnin...rel_q4_09.mspx
Microsoft had a margin of 23%, Apple had 14%.
If we assume Apple has 9% market share, that would mean it made 136 million USD in profit per one of its market share points, and Microsoft (89%) made 34 million USD per one of its market share points.
So while Apple might not have as much market share as Microsoft has, it made 4 times more profits with its "small" market compared to the "big" market of Microsoft (per 1%).
If roles were reversed and Apple had a market share of 89% it would have made 12.1 billion USD in profits alone (86 billion USD in revenue), and Microsoft with its meager 9% would have made 306 million USD in profits (1.3 billion USD in revenue).
I hope my math is right, even if it's just simple division and multiplication without any economical formulas involved.
Apple might be small, but they make a lot of money despite being so small.
Also thanks for the clarification on the market share. I couldn't really read that from the OP's wonderfully worded and spilled post.
Very true on that part. The problem with fat 32 is after about you cross around 8 gigs in HD size NTFS is by far a better choice for dealing with space.
Under 8 gigs fat 32 is by far better. Problem running in to is NTFS only really works on windows. We need another format time that all OS can read and right 2 other than FAT 32 as now cheap flash drives are starting to cross the point were NTFS would be by far a better choice to go with a format of them.
I bet with in a year or 2 give away flash drives will be crossing 8 gig mark.
Of course then the manufacturer would have to pay a licensing fee to Microsoft for the use of NTFS. FAT = free.
Can your TV play back .mkv files? If that capability is built-in, that's pretty cool. That means you'll either need to put the movie file onto a flash drive formatted in FAT32 or NTFS (if your TV can read NTFS). But since FAT32 can't transfer files larger than 4GB in size, you would have to use NTFS to make the copy.
If neither of those options are a possibility (i.e. TV can't read NTFS, file size is larger than 4GB, etc.) then you're out of luck. Get a PS3?