low level formatting?
 

My teacher ( who is full of sh*t , I barely believe anything he says ) says that installing Linux changes the architecture of hard drives, and that to use windows on it again you would have to perform a low level format. Is this true or this guy lying to me again.
Anyways I'm about to get into the Linux part of my schooling, so I imagine I'll have all kinds of questions, so better get used to me.

No it's not true, he's just spouting MS FUD. What is true is windows will not recognise a linux formatted partition, because MS have decided that they are not "standard" ( not windows that is ).

Yes he's full of it. Laughs.

Only Windows lovers would say such things. Or the uninformed.

I've used Linux on the same HD many times in various ways: partition locations & formats. Disk Druid, that comes with most recent distros, can do all the partitioning via point-n-click.

I suspect your teacher is in love with some sort of Windows tools such as Partition Magic. Yes, a # of distros would mess up the table and PM wouldn't recognize it anymore. The key is NEVER auto-paritition.

The only time I've ever had to low-level format a drive is after a Windows virus trashed it. It's happened to two of my clients.

Your teacher is suffering from a cranial-rectal inversion.

Just because prog like lilo make changes to the MBR (master boot record) does not mean that the volume contents have changed / are corrupted.

In DOS the command 'fdisk /MBR' would restore the MBR to the 'windows' *cough* standards.

Linux doesn't use the fat16 or fat32 file system it uses the ext2/ext3 (linux native) filesystem, which is much more efficient than FAT (imho). So, technically if you had a HD devoted to Linux using ext2/ext3 fs you would need to change the filesystem to FAT32, which I believe would require formattiing at some level because you have to format a partition to use ext2/ext3 fs.

But, you have to remember that windows runs on roughly 90% of desktops, so it would pretty much be considered the "standard". But that's just my opinion, I would much rather see Linux as the desktop standard.

Haha, this teacher of mine (teaching windows 2000 pro and server) is a so full of it. He hasn't taught anyone in the class hardly anything, and has attempted to mislead us several times on various topics, I think he's afraid that if he actually teaches us anything that I might take his job.
Anyways, the guy that's gonna teach Linux seems like he's pretty cool, and actually wants to teach something. I've been looking forward to the Linux class the whole time I've been going to school. This is gonna be fun.

Don't forget this place, we're all happy to help you and your teacher if you have a problem in linux :)

thanks

I really don't see the need for tools any stronger than Microsoft's fdisk to delete + re-create partitions. Reboot and format. Far cry from low-level format IMO.

However, the last time I installed using ext3fs all my Canadian money was converted into Pesos. My net worth increased 30% !!! :D

mcleodnine,
I love it! I thought I was the only one who used that expression. Every time I do, a get a second or two of confused expression from the person I'm talking to as they burn a few thousand cycles parsing that description.
:D

offhand, i don't think you're going to be able to tell your teacher about his unfortunate cranial position to his face. if you're going to bother talking to him about his errors, be sure that you know exactly how he's wrong. teachers don't like being proven wrong, and the more they're wrong, the more they hate it, and they always take it out on the student who's right.

so, a few helpful (IMHO) points to remember : in thier view, having linux DOES change the architecture of the hd - i guess some uninformed persons like windozers would consider repartitioning to be "changing the architecture" - but you definitely DON'T need a low-level-format. fdisk will do the job or repartitioning quite nicely - and it wouldn't hurt for you to read up on it a bit before correcting this guy. :)

as far as the mbr is concerned - that has nothing to do directly with linux - that's just a boot loader that could be from any o/s - including a boot manager like NT or 2000, or lilo, grub, and one or two other's i'm sure i'm missing.

Before I got my new rig, I had only 6G harddisk which I had to share between Linux (Mandy 7.2 at the time) and Windows. Because I was constantly running out of space, and I didn't haven enough cash to buy a 2nd harddisk, I had to continually cycle the 3rd partition (all were 2G) between ext2/fat32. It does no hard whatsoever. Your teacher (as has already been established) talks crap. The only time I've ever had to low-level format a harddisk was when some idiot left it next to the loud-speaker of their hifi. Dumb-ass that he was!

Ask your "teacher" to explain the difference between file systems and hardware architecture. Listen to the sound of tap dancing :D :D !!

I shared this thread with several others in my class and all were quite amused :)
Today was my last day with this teacher, thank God for that.
I'm not going to bother correcting him, because as was posted earlier, teachers hate to be proven wrong. I know for a fact I know hardware better than he does and he pulled $116,000 last year, and I can't even got a job, where's the justice in that! I'm sure he could set up nice windows network for you if that's what you wanted, but based on where we are I bet you don't! :)