where there’s smoke there’s forum fire
I was reading another post about how outdated file naming is for pictures
Why can they not make so the first thing you do is name your camera when date etc is setup (Like D300no1) and then the picture can be numbered from 1 to 1,000,000. Yes you can rename and do other need and complicated things, but I would rather have it done easy
What do you think
Pete
Would be nice if they'd get with the time, eh?
Anyone know why they insist on sticking with 8.3 naming conventions? Windows 7 is the 4th Windows O/S without any MSDOS filesystem legacy, and it's been 14 years since Windows 95 made 8.3 unneeded on all major O/Ss.
I don't know, someone one DpReview thought that all camera manufactures had to pay higher royalties to MS if they used a more advanced file system, or maybe they are just to lacy to update
Pete
Licensing costs may be a part of it EDIT - See below. "LFN" (long file names) is the abstraction layer _on top_ of FAT which gives you > 8.3 file names, and it is a patented Microsoft implementation. That said LFN works on FAT 12/16/32.
"A more advanced filesystem" would be FAT 32 which most all new cameras are using - 4GB is the formatted drive size limit with FAT 16 if you want to get tricky, 2 GB is the default max size.
Canon cheaped out on the 300 and 350 (IIRC) lines and could only format a card FAT 16, but would gladly read FAT32 cards formatted elsewhere.
EDIT - the more I read the more it appears LFN is the most expensive license (or at least the only actively enforced license). - I guess that answers that.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Design_rule_for_Camera_File_system
8.3 would appear to be set by a standard the camera manufacturers adhere to.
Cheers
John
You must log in to post.
