TWEAK: Disable 8dot3 AND strip all your files from 8dot3 names


Recommended Posts

disable or not and strip or not, there still is compatibility. for example, on this location registry keys affected by 8.3 are 1000+, but those are all Office14 related and the apps work just fine and have worked just fine.

disable or not and strip or not, there still is compatibility. for example, on this location registry keys affected by 8.3 are 1000+, but those are all Office14 related and the apps work just fine and have worked just fine.

This resembles the XP vs 7 debate.

Unless you aren't using 6+ years old programs or devices (pc components do not count) it is safe to strip 8.3.

Before you start giving people more ridiculous advice on tweaks that can break their OS while saving at most a couple of nanoseconds a day you should learn how to use, or rather not use double negatives. It's the second time this thread you've basically said the opposite of what you mea because you're trying to be clever and screw you the double negatives.

This tweak can, in certain but rare situations, be helpful but otherwise it is not worth messing with.

hardbag: Provide some actual proof before telling users to change it but if you can't do that then why waste your time?. My advice is to just leave it alone and move on.

Heh. No. And when many of the 7 services are needed, many of them are not, mostly for standalone desktop. Though, fsutil 8dot3name strip does not work without server service. But yes, on a standalone desktop workstation and server services are completely unneeded. Perhaps we should not go into a services discussions :D

  • 3 months later...

The Vista compatibility was made because everybody was surprised how many installers were 16-bit. Now Vista completely changed how applications are written, no more 16-bit and no more crap code that could execute in XP. Unless you aren't using 6+ years old programs or devices (pc components do not count) it is safe to strip 8.3.

There is a simple reason many installers were 16-bit: They worked.

Don't fix it if it ain't broke.

Yes, it is ridiculous to release 16-bit software in the 21st century, but if it works, nobody will spend time (and money) on "fixing" it.

About "no more 16-bit and no more crap": Oh boy, are you sure you're on the same planet as we? ;)

Last year I used one of the best/most famous/etc... and to top it, actively maintained file management applications and it failed at its core functionality: copying a few files.

There was also a more or less cosmetic GUI glitch in the progress indication making the information about progress of the operation not visible.

The failure was not copying one of the files in the folder I was copying.

Now image how other, less maintained or even abandoned since 5+ years software works?

And yes, people use them, because:

- they still work

- no budget for changes (purchasing a new version, migrating to other software, etc...)

- no alternative software

It is not a perfect world.

Regards,

David

PS: What, still no benchmarks? I guess I have to do it myself... :-p

  • 2 months later...

A simple test:

1) Open regedit

2) search for ~ Look at "Data".

If you find something like for instance "C:\PROGRA~2\Skype\Phone\Skype.exe" /callto:%1" you've most certainly screwed up your system by using the strip command. Also MS-Office is notorious of relying on 8dot3 names.

So no, dont strip (screw) your filesystem. It is a one-way road to disaster.

While I still think striping the 8.3 filenames will have no performance effect, I did read on Tuxera's NTFS-3G site that disabling it allows the use of normally reserved characters (like \ or ?)

I don't have a setup where I can currently try this, but it'd be interesting to see if the claim is true (for no other reason than to know what's the cause of the restriction)

  • 8 months later...

No clue how I could have been so foolish other than I have a backup system. I went on for quite some time using my computer before the negative effects became obvious. Does anyone know of a repair utility that can restore the 8.3 information in Windows (I realize that non microsoft software is probably just fubar). Again, I'd like to concur with everyone who said this was a bad tweak. Among other things I'm enjoying a 50+ minute boot and when I install my Nvidia drivers for my GTX 295 the PhysX, and Nvidia Update portions fail. I'm sure someone could make a highly controlled system that had just the right drivers and application set so as to not fail with the tweak. How are Nvidia's drivers passing WHQL with this 8.3 requirement? Well I have two choices a full reinstall (Pain) or figure out which was my last backup before changing this setting (equal pain). So I guess it'll just be a clean install then, there's always hardware I'm no longer using or am using now since I changed this setting 6-12 months ago.

  • Like 2

8.3 is not a 16-bit only thing, it depends on the software or hardware device. Also just because you're running Windows 7 x64 for example, it doesn't mean that you will never need to access those files with an older device or program. Another thing, I had to clean an infection off someone's PC once and the malware used illegal file names to prevent it from being deleted manually. However I was able to delete them from a command prompt using the files' 8.3 names. Now it's true most people probably won't need them, but at the same time there's no reason to go in and start disabling stuff for no reason. It's not going to speed up your system.

Precisely put! Plus If your running W7 x64 theres a good chance your hardware is pretty high spec as it is, resulting in this "tweak" making next to no difference in real world terms. Best leaving as is.

*yawn*...useless "tweak" is useless....most systems these days have more gigs of RAM and more HDD space, to where you wouldn't even notice a difference anyway...then there's multi threading, multiple cores, etc...I could understand, if say, you were trying to squeeze every drop of performance out of a machine that is rated for XP, but trying to run 7....maybe then, sure, I could see it possibly being relevant....but with specs these days, it just doesn't matter any more....there's bigger fish to fry, so the saying goes.

  • 4 months later...

This is a valid tweak. I have a smallish system -- big enough HD for progs, but my docs go on a server.

Even so, I have 1.5million files on a 750G HD. If I had 8dot3 names enabled, that would about 50% more.

I have disabled 8.3 names on every system since my first WinXP. Never had a problem

The thing is... MS didn't provide a tool to scan for these and remove them until win 7.

More cores doesn't read disk any faster than 1 core, and cpu speeds are about the same today as 10 years ago -- slower in GHz V. P4's..

To the person above who is whining about Nvidia or the person claiming installers use them -- No. They don't unless they are broken. Nvidia doesn't use them. BUT NOTE -- you have to remove the short references from the Registry (you have to convert them to their long-name equiv's BEFORE you delete the on disk ones. Also note -- turning off 8dot3 on your system doesn't get rid of existing ones, so that's a VERY safe option to stop your system from getting worse performance, over time.

FWIW -- the MSutil will scan and tell you whih keys in the registry need to be fixed.

I found saving the reg to a file and fixing them in the file w/a mass-replace text editor, then reading the .reg file back in was much easier than trying to make the changes vi regedit.

Main points:

-- turning off 8dot3 is perfectly safe -- been doing it since XP first came out (along w/turning off last-access time recording).

-- deleting existing 8dot3 names is 99.9% safe *IF* you clean up your registry when you do it. (I say 99.9%, since there may be some some apps that store 8.3 names in some local file instead of using the registry, but I have yet to find such). If this was linux it would be *far* *less* *safe* because linux doesn't have a registry -- a central place where all the configuration information of the computer and user can be stored and updated (Which linux folks often tout as a feature... but this is an example of where it could have downsides).

* (Note, I have had a fair bit of experience in cleaning up paths in my registry, as I was doing it on my home computers when XP first came

out. My home directory on WinXP was '/home/. My documents folder was just 'Documents', not "My documents"... got rid of most of the long names and spaces as they made my life more difficult. I would change them on initial system setup (the longer you wait after setup, the more places you'll have to correct). I did it the same then save each 'hive' to disk in Unicode Reg5 format, then edit the file with 'vim'...)...

For me -- every little tweak is worth it in the long term. ... the big nono on this tweak is NOT cleaining up your reg at the same time you do your

disk. That will cause problems, almost guaranteed.

Even so, I have 1.5million files on a 750G HD. If I had 8dot3 names enabled, that would about 50% more.

ugh, groan....

:facepalm:

But enjoy the one nano second a year this tweak will save you. to bad you lose it in the many many minutes you spent doing the tweak in the first place and again with apps that end up looking for stuff they can't find before going to fallbacks.

  • 4 weeks later...

This is a valid tweak. I have a smallish system -- big enough HD for progs, but my docs go on a server.

Even so, I have 1.5million files on a 750G HD. If I had 8dot3 names enabled, that would about 50% more.

I have disabled 8.3 names on every system since my first WinXP. Never had a problem

The thing is... MS didn't provide a tool to scan for these and remove them until win 7.

More cores doesn't read disk any faster than 1 core, and cpu speeds are about the same today as 10 years ago -- slower in GHz V. P4's..

To the person above who is whining about Nvidia or the person claiming installers use them -- No. They don't unless they are broken. Nvidia doesn't use them. BUT NOTE -- you have to remove the short references from the Registry (you have to convert them to their long-name equiv's BEFORE you delete the on disk ones. Also note -- turning off 8dot3 on your system doesn't get rid of existing ones, so that's a VERY safe option to stop your system from getting worse performance, over time.

FWIW -- the MSutil will scan and tell you whih keys in the registry need to be fixed.

I found saving the reg to a file and fixing them in the file w/a mass-replace text editor, then reading the .reg file back in was much easier than trying to make the changes vi regedit.

Main points:

-- turning off 8dot3 is perfectly safe -- been doing it since XP first came out (along w/turning off last-access time recording).

-- deleting existing 8dot3 names is 99.9% safe *IF* you clean up your registry when you do it. (I say 99.9%, since there may be some some apps that store 8.3 names in some local file instead of using the registry, but I have yet to find such). If this was linux it would be *far* *less* *safe* because linux doesn't have a registry -- a central place where all the configuration information of the computer and user can be stored and updated (Which linux folks often tout as a feature... but this is an example of where it could have downsides).

* (Note, I have had a fair bit of experience in cleaning up paths in my registry, as I was doing it on my home computers when XP first came

out. My home directory on WinXP was '/home/. My documents folder was just 'Documents', not "My documents"... got rid of most of the long names and spaces as they made my life more difficult. I would change them on initial system setup (the longer you wait after setup, the more places you'll have to correct). I did it the same then save each 'hive' to disk in Unicode Reg5 format, then edit the file with 'vim'...)...

For me -- every little tweak is worth it in the long term. ... the big nono on this tweak is NOT cleaining up your reg at the same time you do your

disk. That will cause problems, almost guaranteed.

You are so full of verbal diarrhea it's comical.

Ok let me inject some much needed facts into this thread.

First of all you need an up-to-date fsutil reference here http://technet.micro...v=ws.10%29.aspx

Now a little background. NTFS keeps the filenames inside the MFT. http://en.wikipedia....ster_File_Table

The links within the MFT are organised so the long filenames form an index based on a b-tree. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B-tree

To find any long filename an efficient algorithm called a binary search (can also be called binary chop) is used.??http://en.wikipedia....earch_algorithm

All very well and good so far. Now the trouble with 8dot3names is that they are not part of any index, they are just another MFT attribute.

To find an 8dot3name requires a sequential search of the MFT records that belong to the relevant directory.

So this could lead to extra disk i/o when:

1) Adding or renaming a file.??A search is required to ensure the new 8dot3name is unique.

2) Finding a file (existing or not) referred to by an 8dot3name.

It is true that even now with 64bit OS like Win7 and 8 some software still uses 8dot3names (shame on you programmers!) and therefore could be problematic in the absence of those 8dot3names.

IMHO the best solution is to disable 8dot3 name creation for all volumes except the system volume. Like this:

fsutil 8dot3name set 3

and then use fsutil strip on all non-system volumes.

So this way it covers your media libraries (or whatever) that is kept elsewhere not on the system volume.

This also means that those misbehaved installers are ok because they will generally use %temp% which is normally back on the system volume.

Um well hope that was clear.

Tim

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • And the fact that the majority of people from Poland are white European Christians while the people you are complaining about in post after post are not is just a coincidence... Every sentence in your post I am replying to is racist nonsense. None of it is actually based on any facts whatsoever. All immigrants are seeking a better life too. It's literally the only reason they would risk everything and leave their homes, families, and homeland. They are working and contributing to the economy too, as you even admit. They get the same benefits your partner did AND that YOU are eligible for as well. That is one of the key things of the EU and a mark of a civilization. That is the definition of a society where everyone is given a chance, treated equally and fairly, and is judged by the content of their character, not their different skin color or which version of ignorant superstitious nonsense their parents lied about as children. Racists around the world said the same things about the Irish and Jews and Poles (like your partner) and...every other immigrant movement over the centuries. What's your family's heritage, by the way? Were your ancestors lied about with racist fearmongering crapola by self-entitled locals the same way as you are now? If someone like that said the same things about all people from Poland, like your partner, would they be right? Or would you want them to judge your partner based on who they actually were, not where they just happened to come from?
    • Again, this is an irrelevant attempt to attack the messenger. The truth does not require any justification.
    • Removed the blue and underline as you did not post a link. This would also  be considered spamming.
    • Why it's almost impossible to produce a smartphone in the United States by Hamid Ganji If you look at the back of some Apple products, you can see the famous phrase “Designed by Apple in California, Assembled in China.” This phrase appears on products from one of the largest smartphone brands in the United States. These products are designed in the U.S., but their manufacturing takes place in China, India, Vietnam, or even Brazil. But why can’t Apple, as one of the largest American tech companies, produce its iPhones on U.S. soil? The idea for this topic came to me after the Trump Foundation launched a smartphone called the T1 and claimed that it was designed and built with American values in mind. However, this claim did not last long, as it was revealed that Trump’s phone was actually a rebranded HTC U24 Pro, with only a gold case and minor internal component changes. You see? Even a phone that is supposed to represent American values is manufactured in China. With a gross domestic product (GDP) exceeding $32 trillion, the United States is currently the world’s largest economy, while China ranks second with around $20 trillion. On the other hand, the United States is by a wide margin the global leader in various technological fields, and American companies spend hundreds of billions of dollars annually on research and development. From Apple and Google to Microsoft, Lockheed Martin, Boeing, and others, American tech and industrial giants lead their foreign competitors in many sectors. The United States also has no shortage of smartphone brands. Apple, Google, and Motorola are among the major brands in the smartphone market, collectively holding a significant share. However, the vast majority of their products are manufactured outside the United States. So why is it that the world’s largest economy, home to the most advanced technology companies and industrial powers, cannot produce a smartphone on its own soil? Let’s explore this question together. Even threats to impose tariffs won’t work After Trump entered the White House as the 47th President of the United States, his administration adopted strict tariff policies. One of these policies was the imposition of a 25% tariff on smartphones manufactured outside the United States. Trump said he “had a little problem” with Apple CEO Tim Cook over producing smartphones outside the U.S. So he thought that threatening a 25% tax on imported phones might force Apple to bring manufacturing back to the United States. “I have long ago informed Tim Cook of Apple that I expect their iPhones that will be sold in the United States of America will be manufactured and built in the United States, not India, or anyplace else,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. Image via The White House Although Apple currently manufactures some of the iPhone’s chips in the United States with TSMC's help, it still shows no willingness to shift full iPhone production to the country. At the time, renowned Apple supply chain analyst Ming-Chi Kuo wrote on X, “In terms of profitability, it’s way better for Apple to take the hit of a 25% tariff on iPhones sold in the US market than to move iPhone assembly lines back to the US.” However, manufacturing a smartphone in the United States is not as easy as it might seem, and many technical and economic barriers are involved. The lack of necessary manufacturing hubs There is a clear reason why many companies prefer to manufacture their products in China. China has established itself as the main global manufacturing hub for international companies, and over the past few decades, large contract manufacturers have emerged there, allowing companies like Apple to outsource production. One such example is Foxconn, which also manufactures some Apple products in India. Building the infrastructure required to produce smartphones in the United States would require tens of billions of dollars in new investment. Factories would need to be built, essential manufacturing equipment would have to be installed, and, most importantly, a skilled workforce capable of operating these systems would need to be recruited and trained. The United States currently lacks the core infrastructure needed to manufacture smartphones, and for this reason, many companies prefer to outsource production to Chinese contractors rather than spend tens of billions of dollars to build that infrastructure, which is significantly more economically efficient. Additionally, building such infrastructure in the United States could take up to a decade, ultimately leading to a significant increase in the product's final price for consumers. Shortage of trained labor in the U.S. compared to China Decades of serving as a global manufacturing hub have allowed China to build a massive talent pool in the production sector that is almost unmatched worldwide. Today, if a company chooses to manufacture its products in China, it can be confident that the workers involved in production have years of experience in their respective roles and are capable of producing high-quality goods with minimal errors. Even if we assume that tens of billions of dollars were invested in building smartphone manufacturing infrastructure in the United States, finding skilled workers would remain highly challenging. Apple CEO Tim Cook visiting the iPhone 6 assembly line in China in 2014. Image: Tim Cook on X In a 2015 interview on CBS’s 60 Minutes, Tim Cook said the main reason Apple isn’t producing in the US is a lack of skills. "China put an enormous focus on manufacturing, in what you and I would call vocational kind of skills. The US over time began to stop having as many vocational kinds of skills. I mean you could take every tool and die maker in the United States and probably put them in the room that we're currently sitting in. In China you would have to have multiple football fields,” Cook said. Also, in 2017, at the Fortune Global Forum in Guangzhou, Cook once again emphasized the importance of highly skilled Chinese workers. “China has moved into very advanced manufacturing, so you find in China the intersection of craftsman kind of skill, and sophisticated robotics and the computer science world. That intersection, which is very rare to find anywhere, that kind of skill, is very important to our business because of the precision and quality level that we like. The thing that most people focus on if they’re a foreigner coming to China is the size of the market, and obviously, it’s the biggest market in the world in so many areas. But for us, the number one attraction is the quality of the people,” Apple CEO said. Higher labor costs in the United States Producing almost any product in the United States is more expensive than in many other countries, and one of the main reasons is the higher cost of labor in the U.S. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, median weekly earnings of full-time workers in the United States were $1,235 in the first quarter of 2026. Meanwhile, the average annual salary in China's private sector in 2025 was RMB 71,590 (US$9,961). In many parts of the world, the weekly wage of an American worker is equivalent to several months of income. Another important factor to consider is that in the United States, the workforce capable of working on a smartphone assembly line is highly specialized and therefore commands higher-than-average wages. According to an estimate by Bank of America, producing an iPhone in the U.S. is technically possible, but “iPhone cost can increase 25% purely on higher labor cost in the U.S.” However, this 25% increase applies only if final assembly is performed in the United States while components are still sourced from China or elsewhere. In this case, the price of a base iPhone would rise from $799 to around $1,000. But in another scenario, if Apple were to produce the required components for the iPhone within the United States, production costs could increase by more than 90%. Trump’s dream for a “Made in the USA” iPhone might never come true In a free-market capitalist economy, one of the primary responsibilities of any CEO is to maximize profit. Using Apple as an example, Tim Cook’s role is to maximize the company’s profits so that it can fund research and development for new products and invest in areas such as artificial intelligence, while also keeping shareholders satisfied. Therefore, it is entirely understandable that Apple would choose not to bring its manufacturing back to the United States and instead keep production in countries where labor is cheaper, and products can be manufactured at a lower cost, thereby maximizing its profit margins. What is your opinion about manufacturing smartphones in the United States? If you are an American citizen, would you be willing to pay hundreds of dollars more for a smartphone made domestically in the USA? Let us know in the comments.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Conversation Starter
      jessse3334 earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • Reacting Well
      JuvenileDelinquent earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • One Month Later
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      flexorcist earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      506
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      196
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      153
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      72
    5. 5
      FloatingFatMan
      65
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!