News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on On the state of Windows on the desktop. Parent comment

Re:On the state of Windows on the desktop by shmerl on Monday January 14, 2013 @11:12AM (#5055194)
They could implement it for the sake of interoperability. Surely it doesn't worth it from MS perspective since they didn't do it. But the reason is not because they don't have resources or it's some extremely hard problem to tackle. The reason is that they don't care about interoperability until forced. That's their whole approach.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:On the state of Windows on the desktop by marshray on Monday January 14, 2013 @07:45PM (#5057734)
Seriously, how big of a use case do you think it is that someone has a drive formatted with some FreeBSD filesystem which they want use in Windows?

How hard is it to just copy the data over a network or mount the image in a VM running its native OS?

Note that support for the .iso filesystem was recently added.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:On the state of Windows on the desktop by foxbunny on Monday January 14, 2013 @08:35PM (#5057964)
Copy 2TB JSF partition over network sounds like something I wouldn't want to do... An easier solution is to just get a Live Linux distro, and another 2TB NTFS partition, and copy over the data... if you have another 2TB drive.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:On the state of Windows on the desktop by marshray on Monday January 14, 2013 @08:57PM (#5058061)
I know the world looks different when you're the server admin who has to deal with it, but how often does such a partition end up on a Windows server in the first place?
[ Parent | on HN ]