Surge Protector Vs UPS

[westom]

Why would that make a difference when your (flawed) argument is that the file system is robust enough to recover from write interruptions?

That answer was technically correct. Without basic hardware knowledge, you would not know why. You should have also known about extensions that makes possible multiple FAT32 partitions.

You immediately denied/ignored what you never learned. Every disk drive (even before PCs existed) learns about power off after AC power cuts off. You should have known that before casting 'flawed' insults. A USB stick has no such hardware protection feature. If you did hardware, then you knew why. NTFS is designed in conjunction with disk hardware protection as part of a unified solution. A typical USB sticks does not have hardware to protect data from sudden power loss. You should have known that.

Sudden power loss does not corrupt data on modern filesystems. But a destructive event, that once occurred on obsolete filessystems, survives in parables - 20 years later.

 

[beers]

This is getting really off topic, but your arguments aren't even consistent. If the filesystem depended on power-off notices then it wouldn't make a difference between old FAT filesystems and newer ones like NTFS.

You also did not consider deployments such as online/double-conversion UPSes where the primary circuit facing the equipment is not the AC circuit directly. You mention UPSes that have no ground, please show me an example of such equipment.

 

[Renzore101]

http://superuser.com/questions/194412/is-ntfs-fail-safe-in-case-of-a-power-outage

"I have personally handled on this site problems that went from suddenly appearing bad sectors and up to Windows installation completely hosed.

A computer is an extremely complex hardware, and modern hard disks have also become small computers of their own. Each has its own processor and memory, so each is vulnerable to power glitches happening at the wrong moment.

Even if NTFS is fail-safe (which I don't really believe), the components that handle changes to the hard disk are certainly not fail-safe. So the whole question is quite academical and doesn't relate to the real world.

The answer then has to be that NTFS is safer, but not fail-safe."

@westom, I understand that you understand your word to be law, but I do not agree with you. An OS can be rendered 100% unbootable if a sudden outage occurs at the wrong moment, period.

 

[westom]

You also did not consider deployments such as online/double-conversion UPSes where the primary circuit facing the equipment is not the AC circuit directly.

The underlying details of FAT vs NTFS are only summarized. The reader only need know the bottom line. NTFS and other such filesystems do not lose data due to suddenly power loss. FAT does.

Same applies to your UPS reasoning. If double conversion makes it better, well, a double conversion circuit already exists in computer power supplies. Again, the point. One who understands underlying electronic circuits knows why a UPS provides no advantage. Any protection provided by a double conversion UPS was also the double conversion circuit routinely found in power supplies - even in the original IBM PC.

Same applies to a grasp of grounding. Safety ground has been confused with earth ground. An electrical difference was made obvious by concepts such as 'low impedance' and numbers such as 'less than 10 feet'.

Anything adjacent to electronics that would protect is already inside electronics. Transients that might overwhelm that existing protection must be earthed - an electrically different ground - before a transient can enter the building. Please appreciate many and electrically different grounds.

Protection for appliances means a surge must be earthed BEFORE it enters the building. Ground on a UPS does nothing useful. Protection is always about where hundreds of thousands of joules harmlessly dissipates.