I was planning on dualbooting so i originally installed windows 2000 in fat32 but i am wondering if i should convert to NTFS... what are the advantages and disadvantages of both??

NTFS is higher security and uses HD space more efficiently. Remember that it cannot be 'see' by other OS's - without the use of third-party utilities...

I would stay with fat32 unless you plan on runing a NT only setup.

NTFS is definately the way to go. NTFS allows for File level security. FAT32 does not. This partition will be accessible to ALL client types as long as they access it from the network.

NTFS is better, but then again what are you dual booting between. WIN 9* and 2000, Winnt 4.0 and 2000? If installing NT4 you are retricted to ha boot partition of FAT16 install NT4 first and then update to SP 4 or above otherwise 2000 willblow it away!. It 98 adn 2000 you can use either FAT16 or FAT32 (FAT32 being the better but depends on you partitions really) Or the whole family Win9* / Winnt4 and 2000 in which case you have to have FAT16 If it is of any help I have Win98 \ Win$.0 server\ Windows 2000 professional and Windows 2000 Advanced server on my PC. Win98 and Winnt4 on a Fat 16 C:\ partition and Both 2000 installed onto an NTFS d:\ partition

NTFS is better, but then again what are you dual booting between. WIN 9* and 2000, Winnt 4.0 and 2000? If installing NT4 you are retricted to ha boot partition of FAT16 install NT4 first and then update to SP 4 or above otherwise 2000 willblow it away!. It 98 adn 2000 you can use either FAT16 or FAT32 (FAT32 being the better but depends on you partitions really) Ps. If running Win98 already adn Win2K on Fat32 partition DO NOT CONVERT drive if you still wish to use Win98 Or the whole family Win9* / Winnt4 and 2000 in which case you have to have FAT16 If it is of any help I have Win98 \ Win$.0 server\ Windows 2000 professional and Windows 2000 Advanced server on my PC. Win98 and Winnt4 on a Fat 16 C:\ partition and Both 2000 installed onto an NTFS d:\ partition