Originally posted by drewe2000
I will be the first to admit that UFS has a lot of benefits. However, in its current form OS X will suffer under UFS. Classic requires HFS+. Even if that's not an issue for you, OS X is optimized for HFS+, not UFS, and boots and runs substantially faster in HFS+. Additionally, AirPort does not work under UFS, but does under HFS+. This is because some of Apple's calls refer to AirPort as 'Airport' and others refer to it as 'AirPort'. In HFS+ this does not matter, but UFS is case-sensitive. There are probably other things that are broken under UFS. Until Apple fixes these issues, stick with HFS+, except (maybe) for external or extra storage drives.
Originally posted by majortom
I haven't checked yet, but is it possible to partition a single drive and have both a UFS and an HFS+ partition?
HFS+ isn't POSIX compliant and has much weaker security, so that for UN*X apps, it is inferior. However, since MacOS 9.x can't read UFS, you need to have both if you want to support 9.x apps.