Talk:Installable File System

I strongly disagree

I strongly disagree with this sentence: "The IFS interface changes in every Windows version, making it almost impossible to use an IFS designed for one Windows version to work in another." The interface was backwards compatible from Windows NT 4 (at least) up to Windows XP. In Windows Server 2003 there was change (http://64.233.183.104/search?q=cache:DhqBIa-huxsJ:https://www.osronline.com/article.cfm%3Farticle%3D283&hl=en) that could have broken several drivers, but the interface still remains largely the same . - Filip Navara

Well I wrote that sentence more on practical experience.

I tested a NT 3.1 IFS in NT 4 and worked (only the IFS, not the tools -chkdsk, format-, that failed).

Tried the same on 2000 and not worked at all.

However I didn't tried a NT 4 one on 2k or a 2k one on XP.

Also I remember that a Microsoft guy said me that the IFSs weren't backwards compatible, when I got IFSKits for 2000 and XP, but I lost that e-mail.

—Claunia 23:45, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

IFS was also present in Windows 9x/ME

For those who doubt me, the relevant structures and api is covered by ifs.h in the win98 DDK. Actually, there was a pretty good book which was written about it:

• Mitchell, Stan (1997). Inside the Windows 95 File System (1st Edition ed.). O'Reilly Media. ISBN 978-1-56592-200-6. {{cite book}}: |edition= has extra text (help); Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)

More info on this book can be found here and here. --130.127.121.188 16:44, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Installable File System. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20160110130653/http://palissimo.de/ to http://www.palissimo.de/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 14:23, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Installable File System. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150510214930/http://macdrive.com/ to http://www.macdrive.com/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150110193853/http://www.student.nada.kth.se/~f96-bet/HFS/ to http://www.student.nada.kth.se/~f96-bet/HFS/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:15, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

DOS 4.x?!?

I would like to see just one (acceptable) source that IFS was ever available in DOS. AFAIK IFS was developed for OS/2 and introduced in OS/2 1.2. Since Microsoft and IBM, who both were developing OS/2, had a strong disagreement on how OS/2 should be done, Microsoft left the development. OS/2 2.0 was from IBM alone, and Microsoft took the code and made Windows NT out of it. Along with Presentation Manager, one of the things that got included in Windows NT was IFS, which was then also ported to Windows 3.11 and is part of Windows ever since, as it is part of OS/2 ever since.

But not DOS.

This should either be verified from a reliable source (which, honestly, I doubt exists), or deleted. Soon.

‣Andreas•⚖ 13:14, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

IFS per se does not exist in DOS, at all, dunno who created that entry.

In DOS 3.1 the network redirector was introduced, and was considered stable API/ABI since DOS 4.0 onward, I suppose that's where the confusion is.

The network redirector was basically a driver interface that allows to redirect file i/o to network shares, and it was used, effectively, as a way to implement local filesystems, including most famously, MSCDEX.

There is a good explanation about them in http://www.os2museum.com/wp/redirectors-and-dos-3-0/

also they have their own page at Network redirector, and in any case their usage as a primitive IFS system should be added there, and not here.

I agree that the DOS 4.0 section makes no sense here, and I vote to remove it if you want.

Claunia (talk) 01:25, 11 December 2021 (UTC)