Talk:Installable File System

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

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)[reply]

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)[reply]