[STRML]

Arguably, especially in the 8/10/11 era, few of these features are things that meaningfully enhance the user experience. Incredibly, we're still running NTFS and dealing with hacks on hacks on hacks. In the 8 era, a huge number of massive projects were started, promoted, and mothballed.

[Arainach]

You say "still" as if NTFS hasn't evolved in that time. It still has a far more capable permissions model than any Linux filesystem.

Raymond called it 21 years ago: when you change the insides, no one notices. https://devblogs.microsoft.com/oldnewthing/20040525-00/?p=39...

[M95D]

> It still has a far more capable permissions model than any Linux filesystem.

And every time I format a new NTFS, the first thing I do before puting any files on it is set the drive root permissions Everyone = Full control + Replace child permissions with inheritable permissions.

Because I absolutely hate being denied access to my own files.

[gruez]

>Incredibly, we're still running NTFS

So? Linux is still mostly on ext4, and even though there's theoretically zfs/btrfs, most people are still using ext4. Debian installer still only supports ext4. ext4 might be "newer" than NTFS (2006 vs 1993), but that's a purely naming thing. If you map ext2 and ext3 as NTFS versions[1], they have similar age. Moreover from a feature set perspective they're mostly equivalent. Both support journaling and various features like sparse files and resource forks.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NTFS#History

[Cumpiler69]

>Incredibly, we're still running NTFS and dealing with hacks on hacks on hacks.

It's the painful cost of maintaining backwards compatibility.

For context, I can still install and use Winamp 2.5 from 1999 on Windows 11. That's over 25 years of backwards compatibility. Not something most people need on a daily basis but still very cool.

[cosmotic]

Even more impressive: binary backward compatibility