A Windows XP help forum. PCbanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PCbanter forum » Microsoft Windows 7 » Windows 7 Forum
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Hopeless Data Recovery



 
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #16  
Old October 11th 17, 05:54 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
Ken Blake[_5_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,221
Default Hopeless Data Recovery

On Tue, 10 Oct 2017 19:01:30 -0500, Char Jackson
wrote:

On Tue, 10 Oct 2017 16:44:25 -0500, wrote:

On Tue, 10 Oct 2017 14:12:39 -0500, Char Jackson
wrote:

On Tue, 10 Oct 2017 13:44:35 -0400, Paul wrote:

J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
In message , Ken Blake
writes:
On Mon, 09 Oct 2017 23:19:30 -0500,
wrote:


So, I've come to the conclusion it's hopeless trying to recover from
this drive. However, I am going to still see if a professional data
recovery service can do it.



In case you're not aware of it, such a service is *very* expensive. Be
prepared to pay well over $1000

Wasn't there a piece of software - it either ran under DOS or included
the OS, I think it was bootable in itself - that would repeatedly read
until it got something (possibly taking days to do a disc)? I think it
cost about 50 pounds. (I vaguely remember the name Spinrite, but that
might be something else entirely.)

I don't know if it works at all with modern (even as old as is being
considered here) discs that have remapping firmware.

GRC Spinrite ?

How to beat a disk to death, in one easy lesson.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SpinRite
snip

Every couple of posts in this thread, it might be worth reminding the OP
that ddrescue is really the best hope. If that can't be made to run
successfully for any number of reasons, then IMHO the amount of hope for
success is greatly reduced.

I would disconnect the problematic drive, multiple partitions and all,
until I get ddescue working, even if that means buying a $15 optical
drive if the PC can't boot from USB.


Why is it that in a Windows newsgroup, it seems the only solution to
anything is to use Linux?


It might seem like that's the case, but I don't think that's a fair
assessment. In the vast majority of cases, Windows has a decent
assortment of tools available to get things done. You very rarely have
to use a Linux tool.



I, for one, have *never* used a Linux tool. As a matter of fact, I've
never run Linux on any machine I've owned, not even for a minute.

It's not that I have anything against Linux. It's rather that I see no
need for it, know next to nothing about it, and am not willing to
spend the time required to learn it. I'm happy with Windows.
Ads
  #17  
Old October 11th 17, 06:51 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
Paul[_32_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 11,873
Default Hopeless Data Recovery

Ken Blake wrote:
On Tue, 10 Oct 2017 19:01:30 -0500, Char Jackson
wrote:

On Tue, 10 Oct 2017 16:44:25 -0500, wrote:

On Tue, 10 Oct 2017 14:12:39 -0500, Char Jackson
wrote:

On Tue, 10 Oct 2017 13:44:35 -0400, Paul wrote:

J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
In message , Ken Blake
writes:
On Mon, 09 Oct 2017 23:19:30 -0500,
wrote:


So, I've come to the conclusion it's hopeless trying to recover from
this drive. However, I am going to still see if a professional data
recovery service can do it.


In case you're not aware of it, such a service is *very* expensive. Be
prepared to pay well over $1000

Wasn't there a piece of software - it either ran under DOS or included
the OS, I think it was bootable in itself - that would repeatedly read
until it got something (possibly taking days to do a disc)? I think it
cost about 50 pounds. (I vaguely remember the name Spinrite, but that
might be something else entirely.)

I don't know if it works at all with modern (even as old as is being
considered here) discs that have remapping firmware.
GRC Spinrite ?

How to beat a disk to death, in one easy lesson.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SpinRite
snip

Every couple of posts in this thread, it might be worth reminding the OP
that ddrescue is really the best hope. If that can't be made to run
successfully for any number of reasons, then IMHO the amount of hope for
success is greatly reduced.

I would disconnect the problematic drive, multiple partitions and all,
until I get ddescue working, even if that means buying a $15 optical
drive if the PC can't boot from USB.
Why is it that in a Windows newsgroup, it seems the only solution to
anything is to use Linux?

It might seem like that's the case, but I don't think that's a fair
assessment. In the vast majority of cases, Windows has a decent
assortment of tools available to get things done. You very rarely have
to use a Linux tool.



I, for one, have *never* used a Linux tool. As a matter of fact, I've
never run Linux on any machine I've owned, not even for a minute.

It's not that I have anything against Linux. It's rather that I see no
need for it, know next to nothing about it, and am not willing to
spend the time required to learn it. I'm happy with Windows.


OK, take as your afternoon project, to find a working ddrescue
equivalent for Windows.

I'll wait...

*******

The Cygwin port seems to work, but I don't know underneath
whether every bit of the behavior is carefully reproduced.
And you might blow a gasket, if you had to type /dev/sda
(a Linux disk identifier) instead of \\?\Device\Harddisk0\Partition0
(the Windows equivalent of /dev/sda). Cygwin uses /dev/sda
type references. The disk lettering in that example,
being in the same order as disks appear in Disk Management
(first disk is sda, second disk is sdb, and so on). The
Windows C: drive doesn't have to be on the first disk, and
your C drive could easily be /dev/sdd2 for example. That
would be the second partition, on the fourth disk in the list.

And the Win10 Bash shell cannot be used for any of this,
because the only level of file system access is /mnt/C ,
and no lower level disk access is currently possible. You would
not expect a copy of ddrescue (if provided in the Bash shell),
to work there because of that. I already tried something
like that as a test case.

The major achievement of the following tool, is exposing what
Windows uses for its identifiers, under the hood. And the
"dd --list" feature is a bonus, not found on other
implementations. In fact, it's a shortcoming of ddrescue,
that ddrescue doesn't have a means I could find, to list
the disks before you start work, and assure the
user of what they're reading or writing.

http://www.chrysocome.net/dd

But the chrysocome tool does not tolerate CRC errors, and
like most Windows tools promising sector level access,
simply stops dead at the first sign of trouble.

Even when a tool makes a retry or two, the tool may not
be designed for "multiple pass, best effort" cloning.
And that's where ddrescue comes in.

*******

In terms of backup/clone software, you can have:

1) Tool that will not tolerate CHKDSK failure. The backup/clone
tool may run CHKDSK in verify mode, and if it sees even one
issue, it stops dead and won't do the backup. Windows tools
offering "smart copy" options, typically fail this way.

2) Windows tools which off a Preference to switch to
"dumb copy", copy at the sector level. Now you no longer
have to pass CHKDSK. But, if there is even one sector
read with a CRC error, these tools stop dead.

And to make matters worse, some dumb-ass tools doing (2),
they do *not* copy the whole disk. They only copy what they
*think* is every cluster with user data on it. This is how
I managed to make a "dumb" clone which should have taken
five hours, it only took ten minutes. Right away, I knew
the tool was not "forensic grade" and was "garbage".

3) The next level, is the level not available in ordinary
Windows software. That's the ddrescue sector-error-tolerant
software, which copies the entire disk. This is your
research project this afternoon.

Have fun,
Paul
  #18  
Old October 11th 17, 09:36 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
Char Jackson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,449
Default Hopeless Data Recovery

On Wed, 11 Oct 2017 09:54:57 -0700, Ken Blake
wrote:

On Tue, 10 Oct 2017 19:01:30 -0500, Char Jackson
wrote:

On Tue, 10 Oct 2017 16:44:25 -0500, wrote:

On Tue, 10 Oct 2017 14:12:39 -0500, Char Jackson
wrote:

On Tue, 10 Oct 2017 13:44:35 -0400, Paul wrote:

J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
In message , Ken Blake
writes:
On Mon, 09 Oct 2017 23:19:30 -0500,
wrote:


So, I've come to the conclusion it's hopeless trying to recover from
this drive. However, I am going to still see if a professional data
recovery service can do it.



In case you're not aware of it, such a service is *very* expensive. Be
prepared to pay well over $1000

Wasn't there a piece of software - it either ran under DOS or included
the OS, I think it was bootable in itself - that would repeatedly read
until it got something (possibly taking days to do a disc)? I think it
cost about 50 pounds. (I vaguely remember the name Spinrite, but that
might be something else entirely.)

I don't know if it works at all with modern (even as old as is being
considered here) discs that have remapping firmware.

GRC Spinrite ?

How to beat a disk to death, in one easy lesson.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SpinRite
snip

Every couple of posts in this thread, it might be worth reminding the OP
that ddrescue is really the best hope. If that can't be made to run
successfully for any number of reasons, then IMHO the amount of hope for
success is greatly reduced.

I would disconnect the problematic drive, multiple partitions and all,
until I get ddescue working, even if that means buying a $15 optical
drive if the PC can't boot from USB.

Why is it that in a Windows newsgroup, it seems the only solution to
anything is to use Linux?


It might seem like that's the case, but I don't think that's a fair
assessment. In the vast majority of cases, Windows has a decent
assortment of tools available to get things done. You very rarely have
to use a Linux tool.



I, for one, have *never* used a Linux tool. As a matter of fact, I've
never run Linux on any machine I've owned, not even for a minute.

It's not that I have anything against Linux. It's rather that I see no
need for it, know next to nothing about it, and am not willing to
spend the time required to learn it. I'm happy with Windows.


Exactly. Until you have a need for it, there's little reason to check it
out unless you're just curious. But in the current case being discussed,
I'd say there's a definite need for it.

--

Char Jackson
  #19  
Old October 11th 17, 10:03 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
No_Name
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 30
Default Hopeless Data Recovery

On Wed, 11 Oct 2017 15:36:48 -0500, Char Jackson
wrote:


to use a Linux tool.



I, for one, have *never* used a Linux tool. As a matter of fact, I've
never run Linux on any machine I've owned, not even for a minute.

It's not that I have anything against Linux. It's rather that I see no
need for it, know next to nothing about it, and am not willing to
spend the time required to learn it. I'm happy with Windows.


Exactly. Until you have a need for it, there's little reason to check it
out unless you're just curious. But in the current case being discussed,
I'd say there's a definite need for it.


I wanted ro learn Linux because I am not happy with the direction that
Windows has been going. If MS kept supporting their older OSs. I'd be ok
with Windows, but they are forcing people to use their new crap. I like
Windows 98, and XP. From what I've heard, I'd probably like Win7 too,
but I have not had the opportunity to use it. But I wont touch Win 8.x
or 10. I dont want or need anything that bloated, complicated, or
something that spys on me.

It's very sad and unfortunate that Linux has been going the same
direction. A few years ago, Linux was a way to use old hardware. Now
Linux is as bloated as Windows 8 or 10. And considering that linux has a
zillion distros, you would think that at least a few of them would still
be simple and easy. Linux is far from easy as it is. Windows was always
more user friendly and easy to use.

I have tried many linux distros, most wont even load and the few that
did would freeze up. (that was about 4 years ago). I learned to hate
linux, and still do. However, there was one distro that I liked, and
that was Pc-Linux OS. That think worked and almost looked like Win98. It
boots from a flash drive, runs well on older computers, and it's easy to
learn. Unfortunately they killed that one too. Now it's all 64bit.

In the end, if I have anything to say, I think we are all way overdue
for an entirely new operating system. NOT WINDOWS, NOT LINUX, but
something totally new. However, I dont see that happening anytime soon.

If MS really wanted to win back customers, they would create a simple
OS, such as XP and support it indefinitely. At the same time they can
continue to create their Windows 11 and beyond, for those Millenials who
cant live without more power, and more buttons. After all, since none of
them ever leave Facebook, none of those extra buttons ever get used
anyhow.


  #20  
Old October 15th 17, 07:20 AM posted to alt.windows7.general
Paul[_32_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 11,873
Default Hopeless Data Recovery

wrote:


Why is it that in a Windows newsgroup, it seems the only solution to
anything is to use Linux?


I ran into this while looking for something else.

http://www.r-studio.com/

"Creates IMAGE FILES for an entire Hard Disk, Partition or its part.
Such image files can be compressed and split into several files to
put it on CD/DVD/flash or FAT16/FAT32/exFAT. Then the image files
can be processed like regular disks."

I think that's roughly equivalent to ddrescue, except
it dumps to a large file, rather than cloning to a disk.
Once you have the large file, you should be able to
use regular dd to clone the image to a real disk drive.

http://www.chrysocome.net/dd

http://www.chrysocome.net/downloads/dd-0.6beta3.zip

R-Studio runs in trial mode until you buy a license. I think
the idea is, it teases you with the availability
of your files, so perhaps you get the ddrescue part
of it "for free". The license is rather expensive, as
it violates the "$39.95 code of the hills" on such things.
Notice how the table on that page, sells a FAT32 tool
separate from an NTFS tool, forcing you to buy
the $79.99 version to get a reasonable feature set.

Paul
  #21  
Old October 15th 17, 10:52 AM posted to alt.windows7.general
No_Name
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 30
Default Hopeless Data Recovery

On Sun, 15 Oct 2017 02:20:55 -0400, Paul wrote:

wrote:


Why is it that in a Windows newsgroup, it seems the only solution to
anything is to use Linux?


I ran into this while looking for something else.

http://www.r-studio.com/

"Creates IMAGE FILES for an entire Hard Disk, Partition or its part.
Such image files can be compressed and split into several files to
put it on CD/DVD/flash or FAT16/FAT32/exFAT. Then the image files
can be processed like regular disks."

I think that's roughly equivalent to ddrescue, except
it dumps to a large file, rather than cloning to a disk.
Once you have the large file, you should be able to
use regular dd to clone the image to a real disk drive.

http://www.chrysocome.net/dd

http://www.chrysocome.net/downloads/dd-0.6beta3.zip

R-Studio runs in trial mode until you buy a license. I think
the idea is, it teases you with the availability
of your files, so perhaps you get the ddrescue part
of it "for free". The license is rather expensive, as
it violates the "$39.95 code of the hills" on such things.
Notice how the table on that page, sells a FAT32 tool
separate from an NTFS tool, forcing you to buy
the $79.99 version to get a reasonable feature set.

Paul


When I get back to trying to retrieve my data, I may look into this. But
for now, I put that drive away. It had me too frustrated already. I have
pretty much accepted that much of my data is gone forever, but I was
hoping that I may run across someone who is more tekkie than me, who may
be able to do something with it. In the meantime, I am seeking the
websites to replace some of that data, piece by piece.

There is a slight bit of a bright side to all of this. Before tossing
this drive into my pile of abandoned projects, I booted up my XP machine
with my old version of PC Linux OS. I plugged in that bad drive using
the Drive to USB cables. Under PcLinux I was able to copy the entire
folders I lack on my backups. They copied fairly well, and did not quit
copying when it hit the bad files. In the end, it saved almost all the
graphic images, text files, and saved HTML files. It did save almost all
of my PDF files, and all of them open in my PDF reader. However, some of
them are missing parts, have blank spaces, or contain random colors that
are not original. Yet, this is the most complete method I found to
retrieve the bad files. Windows did not even come close to saving them
like PcLinux did.

So, although I have said I hate Linux, I have to admit, this old version
of PcLinux (which I believe is from 2009), is far superior to Windows
for this purpose, and deserves praise. In fact, I may take one of my old
computers and install it permanently on that machine. It's just too bad
that this one and only linux distro which really works well, has been
abandoned.


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off






All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:17 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PCbanter.
The comments are property of their posters.