Linux Reader has existed for a while (Win 2000/XP era). If I remember correctly, it was originally called ‘ext2read’ (or similar) despite being also able to read ext3 (and now ext4).
It seems to allow read-only access for several filesystems including ext2/3/4 (free version), however, ext2/3/4 isn’t specifically mentioned as having read/write access (pro version).
That said, even having read-only access to ext2/3/4 (and HFS, HFS+, APFS, ZFS, XFS) from Windows can be invaluable; especially in a multiboot environment.
Answering the question at hand - because the topic has drifted completely out of control as the initial topic was never about capabilities of reading various Linux filesystems.
OOB you have three options
!. ntfs
2. vfat (FAT32)
3. exfat
NTFS should not be the first choice. While there is support for it with LInux it is proprietary filesystem and maintenance should be done from within a booted Windows system.
FAT32 has full kernel support - wellknown specification (EFI system mandate) - but file size is limited to 4G per file.
exfat has full kernel support - is opensource - with a max filesize of 128PB
Decide what your usecase suggests an stick to that.
One more question. I see that, at least from KDE Partition Manager, it is not possible to shrink an exFAT partition. Is this a limitation of this file system or the KDE application? Is there anywhere in the technical specifications of this file system where it is expressly stated that it does not support the shrink operation?
Nope. It is more logical to to use FAT32, because we need the lowest common denominator with full compatibility. Anyhow… how often do shrink and grow a partition? This whole discussion is becoming absurd. exfat and ntfs have downsides and also vfat limitations.
It is, yes. But the worst wear, AFAIK, is a drive’s up- and down spinning, so keep it on, and you minimize the wear and maximize its lifetime. (Well, except if you keep it off the qwhole time, but that’s not lifetime, that’s standby time.)
My own computer here — an actual desktop mid-tower; does anyone still remember those? — has a now 7-year-old SATA2 HDD in it, and it’s still going strong. I use it for storing my backups — the operating system itself lives on an SATA3 SSD.
It’s a limitation of the filesystem.
I do not know, but exfat is only an extension of vfat, which in turn is only an extension of msdos, i.e. FAT12 and FAT16. The basic design of these filesystems is so archaic that resizing them is just not possible.
FAT12 goes back to the Digital Research CP/M operating system and was initially intended to only be used on floppy disks, because neither CP/M nor the machines it was developed for had any support for HDDs.
And by the time personal computers started supporting HDDs, those HDDs were usually so small — 5 or 10 MiB — that you could use a single partition on them. Later on, this would appear problematic, because HDD sizes of 40 MiB exceeded the 32 MiB maximum size for partitions that DOS allowed, and therefore the drive would be partitioned with two partitions — a 32 MiB primary one and an 8 MiB logical one inside an extended partition container.
Resizing partitions and/or filesystems was never even a consideration in those days.
It’s interesting that so far UDF hasn’t been mentioned. There is support for it in the Linux kernel, Windows, and even that other OS.
From Redhat:- “Universal Disk Format is a vendor neutral file system that can be used on fixed and removable drives/partitions and allows storing data in an open standard format that can be shared across different operating systems.”
Support-wise, i vote for FAT32. If one has to download a file more than 4GB one can use another partition for such rare cases.
The only BIG downside is, it not a journalled system.
I used to recommend udf in the past, given that it supports POSIX file ownership and permissions and that it’s supported in both operating systems, but the problem with udf is that there are different formats/versions, and not all of them are writable to GNU/Linux.
Anyhow… how often do shrink and grow a partition? This whole discussion is becoming absurd. exfat and ntfs have downsides and also vfat limitations.
— has a now 7-year-old SATA2 HDD in it, and it’s still going strong. I use it for storing my backups — the operating system itself lives on an SATA3 SSD. 
