Wirelessly posted (9500: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 5.0; Series80/2.0 Nokia9500/05.22 Profile/MIDP-2.0 Configuration/CLDC-1.1))
S80 supports only FAT16, which sadly limits storage options. Newer Symbians allow FAT32. How hard would it be to backport FAT32 support into S80? Does anyone have a clue on complexity or where to begin? If not obnoxiously difficult, I may take it up as a pet project.
The FAT16 format supports up to 4GB file systems.
When do you expect to get an MMC bigger than 4GB?
Wirelessly posted (9500: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 5.0; Series80/2.0 Nokia9500/05.22 Profile/MIDP-2.0 Configuration/CLDC-1.1))
N/A wrote:The FAT16 format supports up to 4GB file systems.When do you expect to get an MMC bigger than 4GB?
That's only part of the problem. I read on Wikipedia that FAT16 supports up to 65536 (2^16) clusters, and each cluster can be up to 32768 (2^15) bytes in size. This means the filesystem can support up to 2GB (2^(16+15) = 2^31 = 2GB). I currently use a 2GB MMC, so 4GB does not seem that far off. The bigger problem is the huge clusters, requiring each file to take up at least 32KB. When I back up 11MB to MMC, the backup takes some 40MB in size. FAT32 is the natural next step to solve this.
True, but does it really matter? If you back up multiple files to a single archive/backup file (instead of just duplicating the directory structure and each individual file), you end up saving space (and minimum cluster size doesn't matter at all).
If the archive also compresses data (e.g., use a .zip file), you "save" even more space.
So, while it might be nice to solve a problem proactively sometimes, in this case it is not worth it; especially because, even if you wanted to, you can't replace/override the built-in file system support anyway. 😉