How can Linux read so many types of file systems but Windows cannot?

[jj1984]

Hello,

I've used both Linux and Windows, and I've noticed that Windows seems rather limited with respect to types of file systems it can interpret.

Windows handles FAT, FAT32, and NTFS, but I can't think of any others.

Linux, however, can handle all of those and many more such as ext2, ext3, etc.

Linux can read a file system created by Windows, but the reverse does not hold.

Why the difference?

 

[_Kyle_]

Linux is a homemade OS, Windows is not. Basically windows wants you to pay for the software to open the files, while Linux, being free and open source, does not.

 

[jj1984]

But there are file system drivers for windows for these other file systems, right?

 

[_Kyle_]

But there are file system drivers for windows for these other file systems, right?

On older versions of Windows, yes. Over the years Windows has gotten greedier. The Full version of Windows 10 does have these drivers, but not the OEM of free version.

 

[DMGrier]

In my opinion it has nothing to do with greed, it has to do with need. Windows doesn't need to read/write from ext2/3/4 as how many users that plug something into a Windows computer is actually using those file systems. Even from a server environment stance, servers generally communicate via nfs shares, smb shares or manual moves using SFTP which makes file systems irrelevant.

Another side of the argument would be IMO why would MS build in compatibility for old file systems? ext2/3/4 have a place on the Linux desktop but huge strides are being made (success on server) to move to btrfs, xfs and zfs. ext2/3/4 are quiet old, so even if MS had a need to build in the compatibility it would probably be the future file systems Linux will end up going to eventually.

Last side of the argument but kind of ties into the first one, why does Linux support so many to include ntfs? Because unlike Windows, Linux is more then just a desktop/Server OS, literally runs on everything! You have tools out there that will boot off a thumb drive with a GUI utility that will let you edit partitions (gparted live), clone one drive to the next (clonezilla) or name any Linux OS that is meant to penetration test a Windows desktop computer. So in a sense Linux unlike Windows has a purpose to see many different file system as some utilities and flavors of Linux couldn't do there job without that compatibility.

The better question I have for you, and I have not tested but it is an interesting idea.... If you enable the Ubuntu sub system in Windows 10, could you then see the different filesystems?

 

[_Kyle_]

Good argument.

 

[Cromewell]

Linux can read a file system created by Windows, but the reverse does not hold.

It is a different environment. You do not often see "official" third party filesystem drivers on Windows. People make fs drivers for windows, https://github.com/maharmstone/btrfs, http://www.paragon-drivers.com/extfs-windows/ to name a couple. But realistically, Microsoft had/still has a ton of the marketshare on OSes. Why do they need to integrate with some other filesystem? As DMGrier said above, the network layer removes the need to do this for most use cases. People running windows rarely, if ever, need to mount ext/btr/z drives.

In addition, no one will use the Windows recovery console to try and recover a Linux system. But nearly everyone uses a Linux disk to recover a Windows system.

 

[DMGrier]

Good argument.

Thanks for the reply, but I promise you that I am not trying to make an argument, more or less to educate.

Every OS has it's ups and downs. I work in a environment where I manage 18 virtual server in a VMware environment which are a mixture of Linux and Windows server operating systems, 150 workstations all Windows (except mine ) and numerous switches/edge routers/firewalls all across six locations. The thing I have learned over time is every OS has it's benefit. Linux may be more compatible with different filesystems but falls short in the number of GUI tools to make simple task even more simple, central end node management services and when we are talking desktop OS's not enough third party software support.

Linux has strengths in better compatibility to run on enterprise hardware, more flexible licensing to all it's users to create, extremely superior in performance/stability and in terms of a command line interface Microsoft's Powershell has a way to go to compare to something like Bash (IMO).

Every OS has an up and a down, my answer is to always use what software works best for your needs. If both work for your needs then your pretty lucky and choose what you like best!