A Windows XP help forum. PCbanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PCbanter forum » Microsoft Windows 7 » Windows 7 Forum
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

"CONVERT is not available for EXFAT drives."



 
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #31  
Old September 14th 14, 03:06 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
Ken Blake[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,318
Default "CONVERT is not available for EXFAT drives."

On Sun, 14 Sep 2014 02:05:22 -0400, ". . .winston"
wrote:

Ken Blake wrote:
On Sat, 13 Sep 2014 15:18:28 -0700, "Gene E. Bloch"
wrote:

On Sat, 13 Sep 2014 12:52:36 -0700, Ken Blake wrote:

Thanks, I thought it was a slang term and wouldn't be in the
dictionary.

Every (American English) dictionary I have includes slang.



But this is British, not American. g

Yes, dictionaries include some slang, but *many* slang terms are not
in them.



I'm too lazy to look in my OED (it's far away and heavy!).




You made me look it up in *my* OED. Yes, it's there.

I use the OED app. Lot faster than opening a book and paging through to Q.



Do you pay the $295 a year subscription cost?

Ads
  #32  
Old September 14th 14, 11:19 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
Gene E. Bloch[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 7,485
Default "CONVERT is not available for EXFAT drives."

On Sat, 13 Sep 2014 16:42:49 -0700, Ken Blake wrote:

On Sat, 13 Sep 2014 15:11:24 -0700, "Gene E. Bloch"
wrote:

On Sat, 13 Sep 2014 01:38:19 +0100, John wrote:

On Fri, 12 Sep 2014 16:39:11 -0700, "Gene E. Bloch"
wrote:

On Fri, 12 Sep 2014 23:12:58 +0100, lid wrote:

On Fri, 12 Sep 2014 14:47:38 -0700, "Gene E. Bloch"
wrote:

On Fri, 12 Sep 2014 15:14:59 +0100,
lid wrote:

I'm trying to convert an EXFAT drive to NTFS. The Windows program
CONVERT.EXE can't do it.

C:\Users\Tadeuszconvert e: /fs:ntfs /nosecurity /x
CONVERT is not available for EXFAT drives.

C:\Users\Tadeusz

Is it possible to convert the drive using some other program, or must
I reformat the drive with NTFS?

It just occurred to me that you haven't specified what sort of drive
this is.

John's suggestion[1] is very simple and very easy, but I think he's
assuming, as I did, that you're talking about a thumb drive of a few GB,
not, say, a 2TB hard drive...

The former are cheap, the latter not so much, unless you're wealthy.

[1] Message-ID:

The drive is 128 GB, SDXC card. It's designed to handle overflow from
my internal 128 GB SSD. Particularly cygwin installation files.

OK, then not so cheap...

At Amazon I see $55 and up, so comparable to a 1 GB hard drive.

You mean comparable to a 1TeraByte (TB) drive, of course.
There is no such animal as a 1GB drive available anywhere on this
planet.
1GB USB sticks, yes. Those are almost too cheap to sell.


Yes, John - I meant 1 TB. T is so far along in the alphabet that I keep
forgetting it exists. Or so it seems...I've made the same error before -
rather recently, in fact.


I've made the same error *many* times.

But in my case it probably wasn't because T is so far along in the
alphabet. g

And for John, here's a 1GB drive available:
https://plus.google.com/+YesIKnowThat/posts/V8jkhxtte9i

At that price, I think I'll pass, though.


Is that a disk *drive* or a disk *brake* :-)

Yeah, I'd pass too.

The other day I saw in a magazine a review of a 5 TB drive for around
$250 US, which made me reminisce about my first hard drive, 10 MB for
$800. And yes, that's the right part of the alphabet...

It would have been even worse if I'd been an early adopter...

When I think about those things, my head whirls.

--
Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)
  #33  
Old September 14th 14, 11:25 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
Gene E. Bloch[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 7,485
Default "CONVERT is not available for EXFAT drives."

On Sat, 13 Sep 2014 16:47:07 -0700, Ken Blake wrote:

On Sat, 13 Sep 2014 15:18:28 -0700, "Gene E. Bloch"
wrote:

On Sat, 13 Sep 2014 12:52:36 -0700, Ken Blake wrote:

Thanks, I thought it was a slang term and wouldn't be in the
dictionary.


Every (American English) dictionary I have includes slang.


But this is British, not American. g


That's why I mentioned my dialect :-)

Yes, dictionaries include some slang, but *many* slang terms are not
in them.

I'm too lazy to look in my OED (it's far away and heavy!).


You made me look it up in *my* OED. Yes, it's there.


Thanks.

In all honesty, the main reason I didn't use the OED is that I wasn't
sure which words would be good to look up, so I was chicken - that's
slang for cowardly :-)

Like ...winston, I do have an OED program, but it's old and would
require me to start my XP VM - but even then it works oddly :-(

--
Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)
  #34  
Old September 15th 14, 12:55 AM posted to alt.windows7.general
Ken Blake[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,318
Default "CONVERT is not available for EXFAT drives."

On Sun, 14 Sep 2014 15:19:02 -0700, "Gene E. Bloch"
wrote:


The other day I saw in a magazine a review of a 5 TB drive for around
$250 US, which made me reminisce about my first hard drive, 10 MB for
$800.



Yours must have been earlier than mine. since it was 8 times as
expensive. My first was 20MB (a Seagate ST225) for $200, around 1984.

  #35  
Old September 15th 14, 03:16 AM posted to alt.windows7.general
. . .winston
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,345
Default "CONVERT is not available for EXFAT drives."

Ken Blake wrote:
On Sun, 14 Sep 2014 02:05:22 -0400, ". . .winston"
wrote:

Ken Blake wrote:
On Sat, 13 Sep 2014 15:18:28 -0700, "Gene E. Bloch"
wrote:

On Sat, 13 Sep 2014 12:52:36 -0700, Ken Blake wrote:

Thanks, I thought it was a slang term and wouldn't be in the
dictionary.

Every (American English) dictionary I have includes slang.


But this is British, not American. g

Yes, dictionaries include some slang, but *many* slang terms are not
in them.



I'm too lazy to look in my OED (it's far away and heavy!).



You made me look it up in *my* OED. Yes, it's there.

I use the OED app. Lot faster than opening a book and paging through to Q.



Do you pay the $295 a year subscription cost?

That is the price for the online version that includes monthly updates
and other subscriber benefits.

Apps are much cheaper.

While nothing app related compares to the online or print (which is
equivalent to the 20 volume OED, 600,000 word, 21,000+ pages) the best
OED app is for the iPhone, iPad, iPod Touch and called 'Shorter Oxford
English Dictionary' based on the same 20 volume 600K words, less
unnecessary content and obscure quotations - currently $30.

The Windows 8 app version (40% less words) is called the 'Concise Oxford
English Dictionary' and costs $10.

All app costs are one time cost, not recurring.

Not sure about the Win8 version but a updates have been available for
the iOS version (adding new words and content) for a limited period..the
last was in 2013 ($2) and prior to the current app version release.

There is even a free version app for iOS called the OED Search (think
cloud version) that doesn't store local content but searches the online
but is limited to about 240K words.

Like many, I had the paper version for years (picked up cheaply at an
Estate sale)...the local library was more than happy to accept it as a
donation and help me de-clutter my home.

Iirc, the print edition will soon be entirely discontinued.

--
...winston
msft mvp consumer apps
  #36  
Old September 15th 14, 04:11 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
Tim Slattery[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 223
Default "CONVERT is not available for EXFAT drives."

". . .winston" wrote:


Do you pay the $295 a year subscription cost?


Check with your public library! My public library offers free access
to the online OED if you have a library card. And library cards are
free. Hard to beat that tale.

--
Tim Slattery
tim at risingdove dot com
  #37  
Old September 15th 14, 05:33 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
Char Jackson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,449
Default "CONVERT is not available for EXFAT drives."

On Sun, 14 Sep 2014 15:19:02 -0700, "Gene E. Bloch"
wrote:

The other day I saw in a magazine a review of a 5 TB drive for around
$250 US, which made me reminisce about my first hard drive, 10 MB for
$800.


Newegg currently has a 5TB external drive on sale for $159. I thought I was
waiting for the 6TB drives to either come down in price or at least go on a
major sale, but now that 8TB and 10TB drives have been announced, I'm back
in wait and see mode. Those last two get their capacity increases through
the use of Helium rather than plain old air.

Beyond that, there's a newer technology (SMR, I think?) that, on paper at
least, promises to deliver up to 10x the capacity of anything that came
before it. I'm looking forward to getting 1000TB in a 3.5" form factor.
That's assuming the technology can make it off the drawing board, of course.

--

Char Jackson
  #38  
Old September 15th 14, 06:08 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
Gene E. Bloch[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 7,485
Default "CONVERT is not available for EXFAT drives."

On Mon, 15 Sep 2014 11:33:43 -0500, Char Jackson wrote:

On Sun, 14 Sep 2014 15:19:02 -0700, "Gene E. Bloch"
wrote:

The other day I saw in a magazine a review of a 5 TB drive for around
$250 US, which made me reminisce about my first hard drive, 10 MB for
$800.


Newegg currently has a 5TB external drive on sale for $159. I thought I was
waiting for the 6TB drives to either come down in price or at least go on a
major sale, but now that 8TB and 10TB drives have been announced, I'm back
in wait and see mode. Those last two get their capacity increases through
the use of Helium rather than plain old air.

Beyond that, there's a newer technology (SMR, I think?) that, on paper at
least, promises to deliver up to 10x the capacity of anything that came
before it. I'm looking forward to getting 1000TB in a 3.5" form factor.
That's assuming the technology can make it off the drawing board, of course.


That'll make my mind spin faster than a hard drive platter...

I'm a bit of a hoarder, but I don't know whether I could make full use
of that drive :-)

--
Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)
  #39  
Old September 15th 14, 06:12 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
Gene E. Bloch[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 7,485
Default "CONVERT is not available for EXFAT drives."

On Sun, 14 Sep 2014 22:16:45 -0400, . . .winston wrote:

Ken Blake wrote:
On Sun, 14 Sep 2014 02:05:22 -0400, ". . .winston"
wrote:

Ken Blake wrote:
On Sat, 13 Sep 2014 15:18:28 -0700, "Gene E. Bloch"
wrote:

On Sat, 13 Sep 2014 12:52:36 -0700, Ken Blake wrote:

Thanks, I thought it was a slang term and wouldn't be in the
dictionary.

Every (American English) dictionary I have includes slang.


But this is British, not American. g

Yes, dictionaries include some slang, but *many* slang terms are not
in them.



I'm too lazy to look in my OED (it's far away and heavy!).



You made me look it up in *my* OED. Yes, it's there.

I use the OED app. Lot faster than opening a book and paging through to Q.



Do you pay the $295 a year subscription cost?

That is the price for the online version that includes monthly updates
and other subscriber benefits.

Apps are much cheaper.

While nothing app related compares to the online or print (which is
equivalent to the 20 volume OED, 600,000 word, 21,000+ pages) the best
OED app is for the iPhone, iPad, iPod Touch and called 'Shorter Oxford
English Dictionary' based on the same 20 volume 600K words, less
unnecessary content and obscure quotations - currently $30.

The Windows 8 app version (40% less words) is called the 'Concise Oxford
English Dictionary' and costs $10.

All app costs are one time cost, not recurring.

Not sure about the Win8 version but a updates have been available for
the iOS version (adding new words and content) for a limited period..the
last was in 2013 ($2) and prior to the current app version release.

There is even a free version app for iOS called the OED Search (think
cloud version) that doesn't store local content but searches the online
but is limited to about 240K words.

Like many, I had the paper version for years (picked up cheaply at an
Estate sale)...the local library was more than happy to accept it as a
donation and help me de-clutter my home.

Iirc, the print edition will soon be entirely discontinued.


Several Oxford dictionary apps are show up at the Android store (Google
Play) as well.

I don't know whether they are equivalent to the iOS ones you cited, but
I would expect so.

--
Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)
  #40  
Old September 15th 14, 06:34 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
Ken Blake[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,318
Default "CONVERT is not available for EXFAT drives."

On Sun, 14 Sep 2014 22:16:45 -0400, ". . .winston"
wrote:

Ken Blake wrote:


On Sun, 14 Sep 2014 02:05:22 -0400, ". . .winston"
wrote:


I use the OED app. Lot faster than opening a book and paging through to Q.



Do you pay the $295 a year subscription cost?

That is the price for the online version that includes monthly updates
and other subscriber benefits.

Apps are much cheaper.

While nothing app related compares to the online or print (which is
equivalent to the 20 volume OED, 600,000 word, 21,000+ pages) the best
OED app is for the iPhone, iPad, iPod Touch and called 'Shorter Oxford
English Dictionary' based on the same 20 volume 600K words, less
unnecessary content and obscure quotations - currently $30.



Ah, didn't know that. Thanks.



The Windows 8 app version (40% less words) is called the 'Concise Oxford
English Dictionary' and costs $10.



But the COD is a different dictionary. It's based on the OED, but it's
not the same.


Like many, I had the paper version for years (picked up cheaply at an
Estate sale)...the local library was more than happy to accept it as a
donation and help me de-clutter my home.



My print version is the two volume version. It has all the same
content as the 20-volume version, but with greatly reduced size, so it
needs to be read with a magnifying glass.

  #41  
Old September 15th 14, 06:35 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
Ken Blake[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,318
Default "CONVERT is not available for EXFAT drives."

On Mon, 15 Sep 2014 11:11:02 -0400, Tim Slattery
wrote:

". . .winston" wrote:


Do you pay the $295 a year subscription cost?


Check with your public library! My public library offers free access
to the online OED if you have a library card. And library cards are
free. Hard to beat that tale.



Thanks very much! I'll be at our library tomorrow, and I'll ask them
if they do that.

  #42  
Old September 15th 14, 06:39 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
Ken Blake[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,318
Default "CONVERT is not available for EXFAT drives."

On Mon, 15 Sep 2014 11:33:43 -0500, Char Jackson
wrote:


Beyond that, there's a newer technology (SMR, I think?) that, on paper at
least, promises to deliver up to 10x the capacity of anything that came
before it. I'm looking forward to getting 1000TB in a 3.5" form factor.
That's assuming the technology can make it off the drawing board, of course.



A petabyte? Wow!

That's about 250 times as much disk space as I have now. It's hard for
me to believe that I could ever use that much, but I know that in a
few years my tune will change. A few years ago, I wouldn't have
believed that I could use as much as I'm using now.

  #43  
Old September 15th 14, 11:22 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
. . .winston
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,345
Default "CONVERT is not available for EXFAT drives."

Tim Slattery wrote:
". . .winston" wrote:


Do you pay the $295 a year subscription cost?


Check with your public library! My public library offers free access
to the online OED if you have a library card. And library cards are
free. Hard to beat that tale.


Yes, the libraries in this area all provide free access to the online
full version OED.

....but I doubt, in the case of this thread subtopic which generated
discussion about the OED, I doubt anyone wants to run to the library to
look up 'quids' vbg


--
...winston
msft mvp consumer apps
  #44  
Old September 15th 14, 11:47 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
Ken Blake[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,318
Default "CONVERT is not available for EXFAT drives."

On Mon, 15 Sep 2014 18:22:11 -0400, ". . .winston"
wrote:

Tim Slattery wrote:


Check with your public library! My public library offers free access
to the online OED if you have a library card. And library cards are
free. Hard to beat that tale.


Yes, the libraries in this area all provide free access to the online
full version OED.

...but I doubt, in the case of this thread subtopic which generated
discussion about the OED, I doubt anyone wants to run to the library to
look up 'quids' vbg



I had assumed that what Tim meant was that access to the OED was
provided by his library at his home, via the library's web site.

Tim, am I right? If I'm wrong, I'm not interested in it.

  #45  
Old September 16th 14, 07:08 AM posted to alt.windows7.general
. . .winston
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,345
Default "CONVERT is not available for EXFAT drives."

Ken Blake wrote:
On Sun, 14 Sep 2014 22:16:45 -0400, ". . .winston"
wrote:

Ken Blake wrote:


On Sun, 14 Sep 2014 02:05:22 -0400, ". . .winston"
wrote:


I use the OED app. Lot faster than opening a book and paging through to Q.


Do you pay the $295 a year subscription cost?

That is the price for the online version that includes monthly updates
and other subscriber benefits.

Apps are much cheaper.

While nothing app related compares to the online or print (which is
equivalent to the 20 volume OED, 600,000 word, 21,000+ pages) the best
OED app is for the iPhone, iPad, iPod Touch and called 'Shorter Oxford
English Dictionary' based on the same 20 volume 600K words, less
unnecessary content and obscure quotations - currently $30.



Ah, didn't know that. Thanks.



The Windows 8 app version (40% less words) is called the 'Concise Oxford
English Dictionary' and costs $10.



But the COD is a different dictionary. It's based on the OED, but it's
not the same.


Like many, I had the paper version for years (picked up cheaply at an
Estate sale)...the local library was more than happy to accept it as a
donation and help me de-clutter my home.



My print version is the two volume version. It has all the same
content as the 20-volume version, but with greatly reduced size, so it
needs to be read with a magnifying glass.

Iirc, the 'Concise' is not as inclusive...for apps its in the 200+K
entry range vs. the 600+K range of the 'Shorter' version.

The 20 volume edition (word wise) has about 172K full word entries,
about 47K obsolete, and 9K subentries.

- thus for most a one time payment of $10 or $30 for an app of either
version would appear to be more than sufficient.

Back in high school myself and two other students were awarded National
Science Foundation scholarships to study for the summer after our junior
year in high school at universities (MIT, Rensselaer, and
Carnegie-Mellon) with that award came the full Encyclopedia Brittanica.
- while it was nice to have received the latter award that Funk and
Wagnalls Encyclopedia my limited income parents provided more than met
all my needs.


--
...winston
msft mvp consumer apps
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off






All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:59 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PCbanter.
The comments are property of their posters.