If this decision is wrong please provide at least one well-informed citation before reverting. So I am going to remove the critical part of that paragraph.
On the contrary I found an article from dated January 2007 in which they praise the driver and it's documentation and utilities, though questioning the price.
I've looked around and could not quickly (5 min) find any supporting evidence for criticising the driver for leaving many errors.
There is/was a sentence which reads: "NTFS for Linux: Full write support is available using Paragon's NTFS for Linux driver, although criticised for leaving many errors on the volume when mounted read-write." And naturally enough someone requested a citation. Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.16.160.17 ( talk) 10:29, 9 June 2008 (UTC) Reliability of Paragon's NTFS for Linux driver so if you are handling huge video files, NTFS is better. Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.214.18.240 ( talk ĪLSO fat32 cant handle single files over a certain size (4gb?) whereas NTFS can handle much bigger files. Big hard disks are always faster than small hard disks, so a very large hard disk with very large clusters will be faster than your old disk even if your old disk has FAT32. NTFS handles folders with thousands of files faster. But for very large disks, even if you only have one file, you have to use NTFS, so you may not have a choice. FAT32 is faster for the same cluster size unless you have too many files. does it effects the speed for those who use heavy video conversions -The preceding unsigned comment was added by 125.99.255.26 ( talk) 12:00, (UTC). Ysangkok 20:39, 20 April 2007 (UTC) What is Difference between NTFS & FAT32. There is also other programs in the ntfsprogs project. Why don't we replace "ntfsmount" with "ntfsprogs"?.
3 Reliability of Paragon's NTFS for Linux driver.2 What is Difference between NTFS & FAT32.