Microsoft has been trying to come up with a replacement for NTFS for a very long time. They've had mixed success with trying to extend NTFS with more advanced features like the now-deprecated TxF. There's little doubt that even its creators see NTFS as something of a dead-end. Whether your grandmother is still using it in 10 years depends primarily on whether Microsoft can get its act together to pick and ship a replacement.
> Whether your grandmother is still using it in 10 years depends primarily on whether Microsoft can get its act together to pick and ship a replacement.
So yes she will I guess.
Then it's vital Linux gets NTFS working well.
My partner is not going to use Linux things if every time they try and transfer the 8k 3D holographic photos of our CRISPR'ed dog learning to spell to my grandmother it doesn't work on her Holovision.
True story, last month I just lost about 1 in 10 of my media files on my Linux Share to NTFS issues. So now I run the box on Windows.
> True story, last month I just lost about 1 in 10 of my media files on my Linux Share to NTFS issues. So now I run the box on Windows.
Were you seriously running a Linux-based NAS with NTFS as the underlying filesystem, or did you mean something very different? I can't imagine why anyone would ever think their choice of disk filesystem on a server—hiding behind a network filesystem—should be influenced by what disk filesystems are supported by client devices.
Is this remotly true?
Will my grandmother not be using NTFS in 10 years?