Re: Jolla at Slush 2014
 

It's a normal practice for many cameras which suggest exactly the same thing. So it shouldn't be uncommon for the user to see such behavior. If it's not the first device, user will back up files, format the card and copy files back.

Re: Jolla at Slush 2014
 

Playing devil's advocate, I don't think that most end-users (the blunt-brained ones that are being used as examples by the pro-exFAT folks) would own cameras, by virtue of owning smartphones and shopping around for tablets.

That said, when are we gonna stop assuming that end-users are complete borons? There do exist smart non-techies, yeah. Formatting an SD card is a trivial task, and there's about 15+ search engines just in case one cannot figure it out on their own.

Edit: m-o-r-o-n changed due to Puritanistic speech filter

Re: Jolla at Slush 2014
 

We may have a different understanding of the word 'trivial'.

http://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/SDCard doesn't even cover half of it and is way beyond what most consumers would want to touch.

Re: Jolla at Slush 2014
 

Really? That might have been the common method to formatting an SD card back in...2008? Excuse the hyperbole, but you don't even have to do all that.

Gparted is easy to use, plus you can easily choose which format you wish to implement on the SD card, including NTFS.

Re: Jolla at Slush 2014
 

It doesn't support UDF though for whatever reason. Same thing with KDE Partition Manager.

Re: Jolla at Slush 2014
 

This is all fine and dandy discussing alternative file systems but it doesn't change the fact that to support the SDxc standard it has to be ExFAT. If you want interoperability then that is the only solution.

Re: Jolla at Slush 2014
 

We've already established that's not necessarily the case, hence why we're talking about alternative file systems.

EDIT: Just noticed something. You omitted "officially support" and replaced it with just "support." In that case, I do agree. What we're discussing is a non-hackish workaround for that little conundrum.

Re: Jolla at Slush 2014
 

What do you mean by "support"? Advertise support during the sale? Hardware supports physical cards which are larger than 32 GB. And OS supports them as long as you don't use exFAT. So if that's all that matters Jolla can avoid getting in trouble by not advertising SDXC support. Isn't it the case with the handset already?

There is no solution which has complete interoperability except for FAT32 (at least today). exFAT is not universally supported either. So whatever filesystem you would chose besides FAT32 today, it would be already not interoperable fully. So the question is, what is the best option to chose if you need to use files larger than 4 GB. I guess it would depend on the use case. Camera users might care about it being exFAT. Others not, since they aren't limited by cameras' restrictions and rather limited by not being able to use exFAT somewhere else.

Re: Jolla at Slush 2014
 

You haven't established anything. You and shmerl have come up with filesystems that have even less support than ExFAT, that aren't even suitable for solid state devices to maintain your dogmatic nonsense.

By 'support' I meant in every sense of the word, official and not. Jolla can not claim SDxc support in any way if they do not support ExFAT.

How are Jolla going to advertise that you can use SDxc cards but not officially and not wth the filesystem that SDxc cards mandate for interoperability?

Re: Jolla at Slush 2014
 

So let them not claim it. Would it prevent SD consortium from coming after them if Jolla users would use 128+ GB cards formatted with F2FS or whatever? If that's the case (i.e. SD consortium wouldn't care), then it's perfectly fine.

Let's reiterate - this discussion is not about whether exFAT is useful for some uses or not - you already said, it's useful for camera users at least. This discussion is about changing the stretch goal from one which involves paying for exFAT to something else. Since either way some users won't get all that they might want. And there might be other ways to enable exFAT for those who really need it, as was already pointed above.

So, why should they advertise it? I see no need altogether. They can write that Sailfish doesn't support SDXC by default, but optionally users can buy such support by purchasing a license to use exFAT.