UFS -- is there a dark side?

[ezotyrik]

I recently reinstalled using UFS, hoping to wave goodbye to classic and disk fragmentation. However, I have to wonder what might not work as a result. Curiously, I can't rename my "/" volume for one thing. It always returns to "/" after a restart.

-Brian

 

[rharder]

I hadn't heard about the "/" thing.

I suspect you'll find that your hard drive access is much slower with UFS. That's what people have been reporting here for some time.

Mostly you shouldn't have many problems, but I've read a couple of documents from Apple saying that this or that only works on HFS+. I can't remember what I was reading, but it might have been related to iTunes. Sorry I can't be more specific.

-Rob

 

[chenly]

1. Neither Photoshop 7.x nor InDesign 2.x [yet] work with UFS.

2. Netscape 6.x and later do not [yet] work with UFS.

That's enough for me. Eventually, all Mac OS X applications will support UFS, but not yet. HFS+ works fine for me, and UFS was a nightmare for reason #1 above.

 

[Jasoco]

I remember March 25th, 2001. I had just gotten OS X 10.0 and I tried UFS first. I got that / thing and that alone was enough to switch to HFS.

Looking at that list above, I'm glad I did. I wonder, why is the UFS option even there?