• @QuarterSwede
    link
    182 months ago

    That’s why it’s still being used. Not a major reason to move on for MS.

    Sad to see APFS not on the list (I know why, just wanted to compare).

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      82 months ago

      Not sure if it’s gotten better in the last few years, but it’s also incredibly slow. Like orders of magnitude slower than ext3 or HFS.

      • @QuarterSwede
        link
        42 months ago

        I’ve never thought of APFS as slow. Didn’t realize it was.

        • Prison Mike
          link
          fedilink
          12 months ago

          Yeah that was kind of a weird take, I’ve never felt it being slow nor heard it is from anywhere else.

      • Blaster M
        link
        English
        22 months ago

        If you’re running it thru the FUSE driver perhaps…proprietary ntfs drivers absolutely rip

        Also make sure last access time is turned off, that is a nice auditing feature for opsec, but it slows things down for the normal user. It should be off by default above 256GB drive sizes.

          • Blaster M
            link
            English
            22 months ago

            last access time

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              12 months ago

              There’s a good chance that’s what our issue was. It really struggled with a Java monolith project. Compiling was slow, but Mercurial was painfully slow on NTFS while ext4 was blazing fast.

              Been on Macs at work for a few years and don’t plan on going back, but wish I knew this back then!