Removing FAT support from the Linux kernel would mean that Linux systems
would no longer be able to read USB sticks, SD and CF cards of digital
cameras, and basically not mount any mainstream USB storage device.
TomTom Settlement Aftermath: Get the FAT Out (Groklaw)
Posted Apr 2, 2009 15:46 UTC (Thu) by stumbles (guest, #8796)
[Link]
Um yep. Now you know why Microsoft chose Tom Tom. Easy prey.
TomTom Settlement Aftermath: Get the FAT Out (Groklaw)
Posted Apr 3, 2009 7:15 UTC (Fri) by ncm (subscriber, #165)
[Link]
As I understand it, TomTom could have avoided the problem entirely just by demonstrating their system never wrote long file names. However, there were other claims, and the case itself would have been expensive regardless of merits, so they settled. TomTom got MS off its back, and MS spread around some FUD, so both sides came out fine. I don't see any implications for anybody else.
TomTom Settlement Aftermath: Get the FAT Out (Groklaw)
Posted Apr 2, 2009 16:10 UTC (Thu) by forthy (guest, #1525)
[Link]
You can format USB storage devices with whatever Linux filesystems you
like. Or, when it matters, even NTFS. However, to get "the FAT out", it
also requires parties like digital cameras to cooperate. Since it's not
the Linux desktop users who get sued over FAT, but the device makers
(cameras, navigation, etc.), this is the right place. Get the FAT
out of these devices, use a file system like ext2, where an Windows IFS
driver exists, or one where a driver is already implemented in Windows,
like UDF. This might even make Microsoft happy, because to write UDF, you
need Vista; previous versions could only read it (maybe third parties
could get their act together and write a writing UDF IFS for Windows XP,
and put it on the driver CDs supplied with the cameras - or even on the
SD cards itself, since reading is possible, anyways. Plus an autorun.inf,
so that it installs itself without user interactions...