Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

drive spins normally, DR pgms do not work.

Last response: in Storage
Share
Anonymous
a b G Storage
June 23, 2005 11:52:13 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

I would greatly appreciate any assistance on this problem.

WD 3 gig drive, messed up by incompetent shop. Now installed on
new system as CSL/CS (cable select) as secondary drive.

Most files appear in explorer and are accessible, except that many
give "cannot access drive" errors.

Using GDB, Rescue and PCIfilerecovery, none work. PCIfr appears to
freeze, Rescue does the same and GDB, while not freezing gives a
varying estimate time for the recovery process of 10-20 hours-goes
extremely slowly with many err 10 read LBAs and bad sectors.

Scandisk gets to about 95% of the drive and then gives "finding
crosslinked sectors" and then goes back to 85%. This behavior
appears to be a continuous loop as it never gets past 95% for like
10 minutes.

WD diagnostic software gives "smart status failed at checkpoint 1
and 2-contact tech support for further info.

This is a dell xps 800 mhz dimension, win98se.

Is there any program that will actually work to get the files that
are not accessible on this drive? What is the problem?

More about : drive spins pgms work

June 24, 2005 1:23:16 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

On Thu, 23 Jun 2005 19:52:13 +0000 (UTC), HaHaHoHoHeeHee
<HaHaHoHoHeeHee-_invalid@lycos.com> wrote:

>WD 3 gig drive...

>Is there any program that will actually work to get the files that
>are not accessible on this drive? What is the problem?

Try WD Data Life Guard - free from the WD website.

--

Map of the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy
http://home.houston.rr.com/rkba/vrwc.html

"Whatever crushes individuality is despotism."
--John Stuart Mill, "On Liberty"
Anonymous
a b G Storage
June 24, 2005 2:42:12 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

spam@uce.gov (Bob) wrote in news:42bb2833.100941062@news-
server.houston.rr.com:

> On Thu, 23 Jun 2005 19:52:13 +0000 (UTC), HaHaHoHoHeeHee
> <HaHaHoHoHeeHee-_invalid@lycos.com> wrote:
>
>>WD 3 gig drive...
>
>>Is there any program that will actually work to get the files that
>>are not accessible on this drive? What is the problem?
>

He already did what you suggested:

"WD diagnostic software gives "smart status failed at checkpoint 1
and 2-contact tech support for further info."



> Try WD Data Life Guard - free from the WD website.
>
Related resources
Anonymous
a b G Storage
June 24, 2005 4:09:39 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

"HaHaHoHoHeeHee" <HaHaHoHoHeeHee-_invalid@lycos.com> wrote in message news:Ham967E7E8FD106B0114539sl329HaHaHoHo@213.155.197.138
> I would greatly appreciate any assistance on this problem.
>
> WD 3 gig drive, messed up by incompetent shop. Now installed on
> new system as CSL/CS (cable select) as secondary drive.
>
> Most files appear in explorer and are accessible, except that many
> give "cannot access drive" errors.
>
> Using GDB, Rescue and PCIfilerecovery, none work. PCIfr appears to
> freeze, Rescue does the same and GDB, while not freezing gives a
> varying estimate time for the recovery process of 10-20 hours-goes
> extremely slowly with many err 10 read LBAs and bad sectors.
>
> Scandisk gets to about 95% of the drive and then gives "finding
> crosslinked sectors" and then goes back to 85%. This behavior
> appears to be a continuous loop as it never gets past 95% for like
> 10 minutes.
>
> WD diagnostic software gives "smart status failed at checkpoint 1
> and 2-contact tech support for further info.
>
> This is a dell xps 800 mhz dimension, win98se.
>
> Is there any program that will actually work to get the files that
> are not accessible on this drive?

> What is the problem?

The bad sectors, probably.
It might help if you got rid of them first by running FindBad.
http://www.partitionsupport.com/fbad15.zip
Anonymous
a b G Storage
June 24, 2005 10:20:48 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

HaHaHoHoHeeHee <HaHaHoHoHeeHee-_invalid@lycos.com> wrote in message
news:Ham967E7E8FD106B0114539sl329HaHaHoHo@213.155.197.138...

> I would greatly appreciate any assistance on this problem.

> WD 3 gig drive, messed up by incompetent shop.

Dunno, it looks more like the drive is dying.

> Now installed on new system as CSL/CS
> (cable select) as secondary drive.

> Most files appear in explorer and are accessible,
> except that many give "cannot access drive" errors.

Thats the evidence that the drive is dying.

> Using GDB, Rescue and PCIfilerecovery, none work. PCIfr appears
> to freeze, Rescue does the same and GDB, while not freezing gives
> a varying estimate time for the recovery process of 10-20 hours-goes
> extremely slowly with many err 10 read LBAs and bad sectors.

Thats because retrys on bads slow things down dramatically
and thats why the time estimate swings around so much.

> Scandisk gets to about 95% of the drive and then gives
> "finding crosslinked sectors" and then goes back to 85%.
> This behavior appears to be a continuous loop as it never
> gets past 95% for like 10 minutes.

> WD diagnostic software gives "smart status failed at
> checkpoint 1 and 2-contact tech support for further info.

See what the Everest SMART display says.
http://www.lavalys.com/products/overview.php?pid=1&lang...

> This is a dell xps 800 mhz dimension, win98se.

> Is there any program that will actually work to
> get the files that are not accessible on this drive?

Probably not. Clonedisk from http://www.invircible.com/resq.php
might be worth trying but its not free and you'd need another
physical drive to copy the dying drive contents to.

> What is the problem?

The drive is dying.
Anonymous
a b G Storage
June 24, 2005 12:51:25 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

Bob <spam@uce.gov> wrote in message
news:42bb2833.100941062@news-server.houston.rr.com...
> HaHaHoHoHeeHee <HaHaHoHoHeeHee-_invalid@lycos.com> wrote

>> WD 3 gig drive...

>> Is there any program that will actually work to get the files
>> that are not accessible on this drive? What is the problem?

> Try WD Data Life Guard - free from the WD website.

What part of

>> WD diagnostic software gives "smart status failed at
>> checkpoint 1 and 2-contact tech support for further info.

are you having a problem with ?
June 24, 2005 2:57:59 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

On Thu, 23 Jun 2005 22:42:12 +0000 (UTC), concerned
<concerned@citizen.org> wrote:

>>>WD 3 gig drive...

>>>Is there any program that will actually work to get the files that
>>>are not accessible on this drive? What is the problem?

>> Try WD Data Life Guard - free from the WD website.

>He already did what you suggested:

>"WD diagnostic software gives "smart status failed at checkpoint 1
>and 2-contact tech support for further info."

Then he should contact WD.


--

Map of the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy
http://home.houston.rr.com/rkba/vrwc.html

"Whatever crushes individuality is despotism."
--John Stuart Mill, "On Liberty"
Anonymous
a b G Storage
June 24, 2005 7:48:21 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

"Bob" <spam@uce.gov> wrote in message news:42bbe71d.149814734@news-server.houston.rr.com
> On Thu, 23 Jun 2005 22:42:12 +0000 (UTC), concerned <concerned@citizen.org> wrote:
>
> > > > WD 3 gig drive...
>
> > > > Is there any program that will actually work to get the files that
> > > > are not accessible on this drive? What is the problem?
>
> > > Try WD Data Life Guard - free from the WD website.
>
> > He already did what you suggested:
>
> > "WD diagnostic software gives "smart status failed at checkpoint 1
> > and 2-contact tech support for further info."
>
> Then he should contact WD.

How will that get him his files?
June 24, 2005 7:48:22 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

On Fri, 24 Jun 2005 15:48:21 +0200, "Folkert Rienstra"
<see_reply-to@myweb.nl> wrote:

>> > > > WD 3 gig drive...

>> > > > Is there any program that will actually work to get the files that
>> > > > are not accessible on this drive? What is the problem?

>> > > Try WD Data Life Guard - free from the WD website.

>> > He already did what you suggested:

>> > "WD diagnostic software gives "smart status failed at checkpoint 1
>> > and 2-contact tech support for further info."

>> Then he should contact WD.

>How will that get him his files?

How will posting here get him his files?

At least with WD he will be talking to people who know what they are
doing.


--

Map of the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy
http://home.houston.rr.com/rkba/vrwc.html

"Whatever crushes individuality is despotism."
--John Stuart Mill, "On Liberty"
Anonymous
a b G Storage
June 25, 2005 3:01:47 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

I took a quick look at WD support page; it looks like they are
charging for email support, but I might have misread it, as I was
in a hurry. I do know you have to register. Maybe I'll try phoning
them, but I'm not optimistic about how long it will take to get
their help.

on 24 Jun 2005, spam@uce.gov (Bob) wrote in
news:42bc16ca.5953656@news-server.houston.rr.com:

> On Fri, 24 Jun 2005 15:48:21 +0200, "Folkert Rienstra"
> <see_reply-to@myweb.nl> wrote:
>
>>> > > > WD 3 gig drive...
>
>>> > > > Is there any program that will actually work to get the
>>> > > > files that are not accessible on this drive? What is the
>>> > > > problem?
>
>>> > > Try WD Data Life Guard - free from the WD website.
>
>>> > He already did what you suggested:
>
>>> > "WD diagnostic software gives "smart status failed at
>>> > checkpoint 1 and 2-contact tech support for further info."
>
>>> Then he should contact WD.
>
>>How will that get him his files?
>
> How will posting here get him his files?
>
> At least with WD he will be talking to people who know what they
> are doing.
>
>
Anonymous
a b G Storage
June 25, 2005 3:15:14 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

on 23 Jun 2005, "Folkert Rienstra" <see_reply-to@myweb.nl> wrote
in news:42bb3ba1$0$34273$892e7fe2@authen.white.readfreenews.net:

> "HaHaHoHoHeeHee" <HaHaHoHoHeeHee-_invalid@lycos.com> wrote in
> message
> news:Ham967E7E8FD106B0114539sl329HaHaHoHo@213.155.197.138
>> I would greatly appreciate any assistance on this problem.
>>
>> WD 3 gig drive, messed up by incompetent shop. Now installed on
>> new system as CSL/CS (cable select) as secondary drive.
>>
>> Most files appear in explorer and are accessible, except that
>> many give "cannot access drive" errors.
>>
>> Using GDB, Rescue and PCIfilerecovery, none work. PCIfr appears
>> to freeze, Rescue does the same and GDB, while not freezing
>> gives a varying estimate time for the recovery process of 10-20
>> hours-goes extremely slowly with many err 10 read LBAs and bad
>> sectors.
>>
>> Scandisk gets to about 95% of the drive and then gives "finding
>> crosslinked sectors" and then goes back to 85%. This behavior
>> appears to be a continuous loop as it never gets past 95% for
>> like 10 minutes.
>>
>> WD diagnostic software gives "smart status failed at checkpoint
>> 1 and 2-contact tech support for further info.
>>
>> This is a dell xps 800 mhz dimension, win98se.
>>


I do not believe their is a physical problem with the drive. It was
perfect before this moron tech got his hands on it and he screwed up
the logical tables, prob. FAT on the drive. The drive still makes no
noise and I can access most of the files. Also I ran checks on the
drive b4 this idiot got his hands on it and it was perfect. What is
needed is a program to find the data and rewrite to another drive.
NONE of the so called data recovery programs work; and I don't think
I want to run my good system 24 hours to see if GDB gets anything.
Same for Spinrite. They are too damn slow. I think Rod's suggestion
that I image the drive is a good one. I think maybe Ghost will do
that and can be set to ignore the bad sector reporting. I will try
it. Ghost also has an explore that allows partial restoration of
files, but the last time I ran my version I could not get it to
accept command line parameters that is SAYS it takes. Lots of
inadequate software out there. :-(


Is there any program that will actually work to get the files
>> that are not accessible on this drive?
>
>> What is the problem?
>
> The bad sectors, probably.
> It might help if you got rid of them first by running FindBad.
> http://www.partitionsupport.com/fbad15.zip
June 25, 2005 4:07:24 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

On Fri, 24 Jun 2005 23:01:47 +0000 (UTC), HaHaHoHoHeeHee
<HaHaHoHoHeeHee-_invalid@lycos.com> wrote:

>I took a quick look at WD support page; it looks like they are
>charging for email support, but I might have misread it, as I was
>in a hurry. I do know you have to register. Maybe I'll try phoning
>them, but I'm not optimistic about how long it will take to get
>their help.

I have used WD support and it did not cost me. I got replies in about
1-2 days and they all answered my questions clearly.


--

Map of the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy
http://home.houston.rr.com/rkba/vrwc.html

"Whatever crushes individuality is despotism."
--John Stuart Mill, "On Liberty"
Anonymous
a b G Storage
June 25, 2005 8:47:45 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

"Bob" <spam@uce.gov> wrote in message
news:42bc16ca.5953656@news-server.houston.rr.com...
> On Fri, 24 Jun 2005 15:48:21 +0200, "Folkert Rienstra"
> <see_reply-to@myweb.nl> wrote:
>
>>> > > > WD 3 gig drive...
>
>>> > > > Is there any program that will actually work to get the files that
>>> > > > are not accessible on this drive? What is the problem?
>
>>> > > Try WD Data Life Guard - free from the WD website.
>
>>> > He already did what you suggested:
>
>>> > "WD diagnostic software gives "smart status failed at checkpoint 1
>>> > and 2-contact tech support for further info."
>
>>> Then he should contact WD.
>
>>How will that get him his files?
>
> How will posting here get him his files?

Someone other than you may assist him with that.

> At least with WD he will be talking to
> people who know what they are doing.

Who wont be interested in helping him to get his files back.

Thanks for that completely superfluous proof that you've never
ever had a clue and couldnt bullshit your way out of a wet paper
bag even if your pathetic excuse for a 'life' depended on it.
Anonymous
a b G Storage
June 25, 2005 1:54:24 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

"HaHaHoHoHeeHee" <HaHaHoHoHeeHee-_invalid@lycos.com> wrote in message
news:Ham967FA54D9DE900114539sl329HaHaHoHo@213.155.197.138...
> on 23 Jun 2005, "Folkert Rienstra" <see_reply-to@myweb.nl> wrote
> in news:42bb3ba1$0$34273$892e7fe2@authen.white.readfreenews.net:
>
>> "HaHaHoHoHeeHee" <HaHaHoHoHeeHee-_invalid@lycos.com> wrote in
>> message
>> news:Ham967E7E8FD106B0114539sl329HaHaHoHo@213.155.197.138
>>> I would greatly appreciate any assistance on this problem.
>>>
>>> WD 3 gig drive, messed up by incompetent shop. Now installed on
>>> new system as CSL/CS (cable select) as secondary drive.
>>>
>>> Most files appear in explorer and are accessible, except that
>>> many give "cannot access drive" errors.
>>>
>>> Using GDB, Rescue and PCIfilerecovery, none work. PCIfr appears
>>> to freeze, Rescue does the same and GDB, while not freezing
>>> gives a varying estimate time for the recovery process of 10-20
>>> hours-goes extremely slowly with many err 10 read LBAs and bad
>>> sectors.
>>>
>>> Scandisk gets to about 95% of the drive and then gives "finding
>>> crosslinked sectors" and then goes back to 85%. This behavior
>>> appears to be a continuous loop as it never gets past 95% for
>>> like 10 minutes.
>>>
>>> WD diagnostic software gives "smart status failed at checkpoint
>>> 1 and 2-contact tech support for further info.
>>>
>>> This is a dell xps 800 mhz dimension, win98se.

> I do not believe their is a physical problem with the drive.

That is however what the evidence indicates.

> It was perfect before this moron tech got his hands on it and
> he screwed up the logical tables, prob. FAT on the drive.

Likely that only happened because the
drive is dying and he didnt realise that.

> The drive still makes no noise and I can access most of the files.

Thats a common way for a drive to fail.

> Also I ran checks on the drive b4 this
> idiot got his hands on it and it was perfect.

A dying drive has to start dying sometime.

> What is needed is a program to find the data and rewrite to another
> drive. NONE of the so called data recovery programs work;

And thats the evidence that the drive is dying.
They do work fine when the drive isnt dying.

> and I don't think I want to run my good system 24
> hours to see if GDB gets anything. Same for Spinrite.
> They are too damn slow. I think Rod's suggestion
> that I image the drive is a good one.

Thats not going to be fast either if the drive is dying. Basically
because clonedisk trys very hard to get the data out of bad sectors.

> I think maybe Ghost will do that and can be set
> to ignore the bad sector reporting. I will try it.

Yes, that might see the recovery programs run fast enough.
BUT you wont get back what is in the bad sectors.

> Ghost also has an explore that allows partial restoration of
> files, but the last time I ran my version I could not get it to
> accept command line parameters that is SAYS it takes.

You should be using Ghost Explorer for that.

> Lots of inadequate software out there. :-(

>>> Is there any program that will actually work to get
>>> the files that are not accessible on this drive?

>>> What is the problem?

>> The bad sectors, probably.
>> It might help if you got rid of them first by running FindBad.
>> http://www.partitionsupport.com/fbad15.zip
Anonymous
a b G Storage
June 25, 2005 7:14:51 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

HaHaHoHoHeeHee <HaHaHoHoHeeHee-_invalid@lycos.com> wrote:

> I would greatly appreciate any assistance on this problem.
>
> WD 3 gig drive, messed up by incompetent shop. Now installed on
> new system as CSL/CS (cable select) as secondary drive.
>
> Most files appear in explorer and are accessible, except that many
> give "cannot access drive" errors.

Typical to a mapping (geometry) error.

> Using GDB, Rescue and PCIfilerecovery, none work. PCIfr appears to
> freeze, Rescue does the same and GDB, while not freezing gives a
> varying estimate time for the recovery process of 10-20 hours-goes
> extremely slowly with many err 10 read LBAs and bad sectors.

Typical to a geometry error.

> Scandisk gets to about 95% of the drive and then gives "finding
> crosslinked sectors" and then goes back to 85%. This behavior
> appears to be a continuous loop as it never gets past 95% for like
> 10 minutes.

Typical to a geometry error. The last thing you want to do in such event is to
run file system repair software (e.g. SCANDISK, CHKDSK, or NDD). The latter
will perpetuate the error and irreversibly corrupt the file system.

> WD diagnostic software gives "smart status failed at checkpoint 1
> and 2-contact tech support for further info.

The problem may be genuine (a failing drive) or could be the result of incorrect
HS translation.

> This is a dell xps 800 mhz dimension, win98se.
>
> Is there any program that will actually work to get the files that
> are not accessible on this drive? What is the problem?

After having read the rest of this thread, I'm afraid that you already missed
the opportunity to recover anything of value from that drive.

Regards, Zvi
--
NetZ Computing Ltd. ISRAEL www.invircible.com www.ivi.co.il (Hebrew)
InVircible Virus Defense Solutions, ResQ and Data Recovery Utilities
Anonymous
a b G Storage
June 25, 2005 7:14:52 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

Zvi Netiv wrote:

> HaHaHoHoHeeHee <HaHaHoHoHeeHee-_invalid@lycos.com> wrote:
>
>
>>I would greatly appreciate any assistance on this problem.
>>
>>WD 3 gig drive, messed up by incompetent shop. Now installed on
>>new system as CSL/CS (cable select) as secondary drive.
>>
>>Most files appear in explorer and are accessible, except that many
>>give "cannot access drive" errors.
>
>
> Typical to a mapping (geometry) error.
>
>
>>Using GDB, Rescue and PCIfilerecovery, none work. PCIfr appears to
>>freeze, Rescue does the same and GDB, while not freezing gives a
>>varying estimate time for the recovery process of 10-20 hours-goes
>>extremely slowly with many err 10 read LBAs and bad sectors.
>
>
> Typical to a geometry error.
>
>
>>Scandisk gets to about 95% of the drive and then gives "finding
>>crosslinked sectors" and then goes back to 85%. This behavior
>>appears to be a continuous loop as it never gets past 95% for like
>>10 minutes.
>
>
> Typical to a geometry error. The last thing you want to do in such event is to
> run file system repair software (e.g. SCANDISK, CHKDSK, or NDD). The latter
> will perpetuate the error and irreversibly corrupt the file system.
>
>
>>WD diagnostic software gives "smart status failed at checkpoint 1
>>and 2-contact tech support for further info.
>
>
> The problem may be genuine (a failing drive) or could be the result of incorrect
> HS translation.
>
>
>>This is a dell xps 800 mhz dimension, win98se.
>>
>>Is there any program that will actually work to get the files that
>>are not accessible on this drive? What is the problem?
>
>
> After having read the rest of this thread, I'm afraid that you already missed
> the opportunity to recover anything of value from that drive.

Nothing in his post states that he tried to write to the drive or fix
errors. You seem to have alot of advice as to what the problem is, but
little information on how to fix it? I've notice that your ResQ program
is good for giving alot of mathematical detail and generating arguments
in these newsgroups over what the problem with a drive is, but little,
it seems, in the way of solutions?


>
> Regards, Zvi
> --
> NetZ Computing Ltd. ISRAEL www.invircible.com www.ivi.co.il (Hebrew)
> InVircible Virus Defense Solutions, ResQ and Data Recovery Utilities
Anonymous
a b G Storage
June 25, 2005 9:06:39 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

HaHaHoHoHeeHee <HaHaHoHoHeeHee-_invalid@lycos.com> wrote:
> on 23 Jun 2005, "Folkert Rienstra" <see_reply-to@myweb.nl> wrote

> Is there any program that will actually work to get the files
> >> that are not accessible on this drive?
> >
> >> What is the problem?
> >
> > The bad sectors, probably.
> > It might help if you got rid of them first by running FindBad.
> > http://www.partitionsupport.com/fbad15.zip

In case the drive is dying then this would be the silliest thing to do.

> I do not believe their is a physical problem with the drive. It was
> perfect before this moron tech got his hands on it and he screwed up
> the logical tables, prob. FAT on the drive. The drive still makes no
> noise and I can access most of the files.

Most dying drives do not make noise.

> Also I ran checks on the
> drive b4 this idiot got his hands on it and it was perfect. What is
> needed is a program to find the data and rewrite to another drive.

What was needed was to assess whether the drive is working with the correct
settings, and if it did, then to clone it before it develops too many bad
sectors or becomes inaccessible.

> NONE of the so called data recovery programs work; and I don't think
> I want to run my good system 24 hours to see if GDB gets anything.
> Same for Spinrite. They are too damn slow. I think Rod's suggestion
> that I image the drive is a good one. I think maybe Ghost will do
> that and can be set to ignore the bad sector reporting. I will try
> it. Ghost also has an explore that allows partial restoration of
> files, but the last time I ran my version I could not get it to
> accept command line parameters that is SAYS it takes. Lots of
> inadequate software out there. :-(

The software isn't to blame here.

Regards, Zvi
--
NetZ Computing Ltd. ISRAEL www.invircible.com www.ivi.co.il (Hebrew)
InVircible Virus Defense Solutions, ResQ and Data Recovery Utilities
Anonymous
a b G Storage
June 25, 2005 9:06:40 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

Zvi Netiv wrote:
> HaHaHoHoHeeHee <HaHaHoHoHeeHee-_invalid@lycos.com> wrote:
>
>>on 23 Jun 2005, "Folkert Rienstra" <see_reply-to@myweb.nl> wrote
>
>
>> Is there any program that will actually work to get the files
>>
>>>>that are not accessible on this drive?
>>>
>>>>What is the problem?
>>>
>>>The bad sectors, probably.
>>>It might help if you got rid of them first by running FindBad.
>>>http://www.partitionsupport.com/fbad15.zip
>
>
> In case the drive is dying then this would be the silliest thing to do.
>
>
>>I do not believe their is a physical problem with the drive. It was
>>perfect before this moron tech got his hands on it and he screwed up
>>the logical tables, prob. FAT on the drive. The drive still makes no
>>noise and I can access most of the files.
>
>
> Most dying drives do not make noise.
>
>
>>Also I ran checks on the
>>drive b4 this idiot got his hands on it and it was perfect. What is
>>needed is a program to find the data and rewrite to another drive.
>
>

Aren't you the guy who always recommends Clonedisk? Last time I tried to
download that program, I got a "page not found" at their website.
Also, no one ever explains, that I've seen, the process of cloning and
recovery from that. Do you clone to a secondary drive or to cd-rws or
what? If you clone to the primary drive, will that not replace that
drive's data with the junk data from the bad drive? How do you recover
bad sector data from the clone?


> What was needed was to assess whether the drive is working with the correct
> settings, and if it did, then to clone it before it develops too many bad
> sectors or becomes inaccessible.
>
>
>>NONE of the so called data recovery programs work; and I don't think
>>I want to run my good system 24 hours to see if GDB gets anything.
>>Same for Spinrite. They are too damn slow. I think Rod's suggestion
>>that I image the drive is a good one. I think maybe Ghost will do
>>that and can be set to ignore the bad sector reporting. I will try
>>it. Ghost also has an explore that allows partial restoration of
>>files, but the last time I ran my version I could not get it to
>>accept command line parameters that is SAYS it takes. Lots of
>>inadequate software out there. :-(
>
>
> The software isn't to blame here.
>
> Regards, Zvi
> --
> NetZ Computing Ltd. ISRAEL www.invircible.com www.ivi.co.il (Hebrew)
> InVircible Virus Defense Solutions, ResQ and Data Recovery Utilities
Anonymous
a b G Storage
June 26, 2005 12:03:58 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

Zvi Netiv <support@replace_with_domain.com> wrote in
news:61iqb1h5k0iaqqnfdnhc5s9v3469a3laj3@4ax.com:

> HaHaHoHoHeeHee <HaHaHoHoHeeHee-_invalid@lycos.com> wrote:
>
>> I would greatly appreciate any assistance on this problem.
>>
>> WD 3 gig drive, messed up by incompetent shop. Now installed on
>> new system as CSL/CS (cable select) as secondary drive.
>>
>> Most files appear in explorer and are accessible, except that many
>> give "cannot access drive" errors.
>
> Typical to a mapping (geometry) error.\

Thanks, but that says little or nothing.

>
>> Using GDB, Rescue and PCIfilerecovery, none work. PCIfr appears to
>> freeze, Rescue does the same and GDB, while not freezing gives a
>> varying estimate time for the recovery process of 10-20 hours-goes
>> extremely slowly with many err 10 read LBAs and bad sectors.
>
> Typical to a geometry error.
>
>> Scandisk gets to about 95% of the drive and then gives "finding
>> crosslinked sectors" and then goes back to 85%. This behavior
>> appears to be a continuous loop as it never gets past 95% for like
>> 10 minutes.
>
> Typical to a geometry error. The last thing you want to do in such
> event is to run file system repair software (e.g. SCANDISK, CHKDSK, or
> NDD). The latter will perpetuate the error and irreversibly corrupt
> the file system.

What harm is running scandisk if no fixing is done. Drive is not showing
signs of disintegrating further, since the sector errors seem to be
logical errors.

>
>> WD diagnostic software gives "smart status failed at checkpoint 1
>> and 2-contact tech support for further info.
>
> The problem may be genuine (a failing drive) or could be the result of
> incorrect HS translation.
>
>> This is a dell xps 800 mhz dimension, win98se.
>>
>> Is there any program that will actually work to get the files that
>> are not accessible on this drive? What is the problem?
>
> After having read the rest of this thread, I'm afraid that you already
> missed the opportunity to recover anything of value from that drive.

What makes you assume this?

>
> Regards, Zvi
> --
> NetZ Computing Ltd. ISRAEL www.invircible.com www.ivi.co.il (Hebrew)
> InVircible Virus Defense Solutions, ResQ and Data Recovery Utilities
Anonymous
a b G Storage
June 26, 2005 12:09:46 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

Zvi Netiv <support@replace_with_domain.com> wrote in
news:uoiqb1tejic8hjmvh8v1ke6nqh5do3bolm@4ax.com:

> HaHaHoHoHeeHee <HaHaHoHoHeeHee-_invalid@lycos.com> wrote:
>> on 23 Jun 2005, "Folkert Rienstra" <see_reply-to@myweb.nl> wrote
>
>> Is there any program that will actually work to get the files
>> >> that are not accessible on this drive?
>> >
>> >> What is the problem?
>> >
>> > The bad sectors, probably.
>> > It might help if you got rid of them first by running FindBad.
>> > http://www.partitionsupport.com/fbad15.zip
>
> In case the drive is dying then this would be the silliest thing to
> do.

Agreed. I have done nothing to write to the drive.

>> I do not believe their is a physical problem with the drive. It was
>> perfect before this moron tech got his hands on it and he screwed up
>> the logical tables, prob. FAT on the drive. The drive still makes no
>> noise and I can access most of the files.
>
> Most dying drives do not make noise.

Not in my limited experience. Physical problems generally cause noise.

>
>> Also I ran checks on the
>> drive b4 this idiot got his hands on it and it was perfect. What is
>> needed is a program to find the data and rewrite to another drive.
>
> What was needed was to assess whether the drive is working with the
> correct settings, and if it did, then to clone it before it develops
> too many bad sectors or becomes inaccessible.

Whatever you mean by that. If cloning (assume you mean to the good
drive) means putting my primary drive at any risk, I'm not going to do
that. Already got most of the data off the bad drive, it's the several
files that were inaccessible due to read/sector errors I'm after.
Diskpatch clones drives but states you have to wipe the destination
drive to "reduce noise". Forget that.

>
>> NONE of the so called data recovery programs work; and I don't think
>> I want to run my good system 24 hours to see if GDB gets anything.
>> Same for Spinrite. They are too damn slow. I think Rod's suggestion
>> that I image the drive is a good one. I think maybe Ghost will do
>> that and can be set to ignore the bad sector reporting. I will try
>> it. Ghost also has an explore that allows partial restoration of
>> files, but the last time I ran my version I could not get it to
>> accept command line parameters that is SAYS it takes. Lots of
>> inadequate software out there. :-(
>
> The software isn't to blame here.

Sure it is, cuz no one has created a program that actually does the job.
They all make lofty promises, but fail on delivery.

>
> Regards, Zvi
> --
> NetZ Computing Ltd. ISRAEL www.invircible.com www.ivi.co.il (Hebrew)
> InVircible Virus Defense Solutions, ResQ and Data Recovery Utilities
>
Anonymous
a b G Storage
June 26, 2005 12:44:58 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

"HaHaHoHoHeeHee" <HaHaHoHoHeeHee-_invalid@lycos.com> wrote in message news:Ham967FA54D9DE900114539sl329HaHaHoHo@213.155.197.138
> on 23 Jun 2005, "Folkert Rienstra" <see_reply-to@myweb.nl> wrote in news:42bb3ba1$0$34273$892e7fe2@authen.white.readfreenews.net:
>
> > "HaHaHoHoHeeHee" HaHaHoHoHeeHee-_invalid@lycos.com> wrote in message news:Ham967E7E8FD106B0114539sl329HaHaHoHo@213.155.197.138
> > > I would greatly appreciate any assistance on this problem.
> > >
> > > WD 3 gig drive, messed up by incompetent shop. Now installed on
> > > new system as CSEL/CS (cable select) as secondary drive.
> > >
> > > Most files appear in explorer and are accessible, except that
> > > many give "cannot access drive" errors.
> > >
> > > Using GDB, Rescue and PCIfilerecovery, none work. PCIfr appears
> > > to freeze, Rescue does the same and GDB, while not freezing
> > > gives a varying estimate time for the recovery process of 10-20
> > > hours-goes extremely slowly with many err 10 read LBAs and bad
> > > sectors.
> > >
> > > Scandisk gets to about 95% of the drive and then gives "finding
> > > crosslinked sectors" and then goes back to 85%. This behavior
> > > appears to be a continuous loop as it never gets past 95% for
> > > like 10 minutes.
> > >
> > > WD diagnostic software gives "smart status failed at checkpoint
> > > 1 and 2-contact tech support for further info.
> > >
> > > This is a dell xps 800 mhz dimension, win98se.
> > >
>
>
> I do not believe their is a physical problem with the drive.

I didn't say there was. I said to get rid of the bad sectors first.

> It was perfect before this moron tech got his hands on it and he
> screwed up the logical tables, prob. FAT on the drive.

Then there are no bad sectors, but later on you bring them up again.
So what is it? Surely the tech didn't write bad sectors.

> The drive still makes no
> noise and I can access most of the files.

This has nothing to do with the 'tables' then.

> Also I ran checks on the
> drive b4 this idiot got his hands on it and it was perfect. What is
> needed is a program to find the data and rewrite to another drive.
> NONE of the so called data recovery programs work; and I don't think
> I want to run my good system 24 hours to see if GDB gets anything.
> Same for Spinrite. They are too damn slow.

Again, nothing to do with the 'tables'.

> I think Rod's suggestion
> that I image the drive is a good one.

That too will get rid of the bad sectors but may hold the cloning
program captive. That's why I say to get rid of the bad sectors first.

> I think maybe Ghost will do
> that and can be set to ignore the bad sector reporting. I will try
> it. Ghost also has an explore that allows partial restoration of
> files, but the last time I ran my version I could not get it to
> accept command line parameters that is SAYS it takes. Lots of
> inadequate software out there. :-(
>
>
> Is there any program that will actually work to get the files
> > > that are not accessible on this drive?
> >
> > > What is the problem?
> >
> > The bad sectors, probably.
> > It might help if you got rid of them first by running FindBad.
> > http://www.partitionsupport.com/fbad15.zip
Anonymous
a b G Storage
June 26, 2005 11:02:05 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

harveywallbanger <harveywallbanger@hotmail.com> wrote
in message news:D 9k6vq$hp7$1@onion.ccit.arizona.edu...
> Zvi Netiv wrote
>> HaHaHoHoHeeHee <HaHaHoHoHeeHee-_invalid@lycos.com> wrote
>>> Folkert Rienstra <see_reply-to@myweb.nl> wrote

>>>>> Is there any program that will actually work to get the files that are not
>>>>> accessible on this drive?

>>>>> What is the problem?

>>>> The bad sectors, probably.
>>>> It might help if you got rid of them first by running FindBad.
>>>> http://www.partitionsupport.com/fbad15.zip

>> In case the drive is dying then this would be the silliest thing to do.

>>> I do not believe their is a physical problem with the drive. It was perfect
>>> before this moron tech got his hands on it and he screwed up the logical
>>> tables, prob. FAT on the drive. The drive still makes no noise and I can
>>> access most of the files.

>> Most dying drives do not make noise.

>>> Also I ran checks on the drive b4 this idiot got his hands on it and it was
>>> perfect. What is needed is a program to find the data and rewrite to another
>>> drive.

> Aren't you the guy who always recommends Clonedisk?

Yes, its his program. That should have been obvious from his sig.

> Last time I tried to download that program, I got a "page not found" at their
> website.

If you click on the licensing conditions link for clonedisk, it leads to where
you can pay for it and presumably download it after you have done that.

> Also, no one ever explains, that I've seen, the process of cloning and
> recovery from that. Do you clone to a secondary drive

Yes, and the description of clonedisk basically says that.
http://www.invircible.com/deal/clonedisk

> or to cd-rws or what? If you clone to the primary drive,

That would be completely mad.

> will that not replace that drive's data with the junk data from the bad drive?
> How do you recover bad sector data from the clone?

It attempts to get what data it can from the bad sectors, and copys the
good sectors, so you can bang on the clone as much as you like with
whatever tools you choose to try, and arent banging on the dying drive.

In other words you get what you can off the dying drive and then
you can do what you like at your leasure to the clone to try recovering
what you can from the clone, without it being about to die.

>
>> What was needed was to assess whether the drive is working with the correct
>> settings, and if it did, then to clone it before it develops too many bad
>> sectors or becomes inaccessible.
>>
>>
>>>NONE of the so called data recovery programs work; and I don't think I want
>>>to run my good system 24 hours to see if GDB gets anything. Same for
>>>Spinrite. They are too damn slow. I think Rod's suggestion that I image the
>>>drive is a good one. I think maybe Ghost will do that and can be set to
>>>ignore the bad sector reporting. I will try it. Ghost also has an explore
>>>that allows partial restoration of files, but the last time I ran my version
>>>I could not get it to accept command line parameters that is SAYS it takes.
>>>Lots of inadequate software out there. :-(
>>
>>
>> The software isn't to blame here.
>>
>> Regards, Zvi
>> --
>> NetZ Computing Ltd. ISRAEL www.invircible.com www.ivi.co.il (Hebrew)
>> InVircible Virus Defense Solutions, ResQ and Data Recovery Utilities
Anonymous
a b G Storage
June 26, 2005 11:10:36 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

HaHaHoHoHeeHee <HaHaHoHoHeeHee-_invalid@lycos.com> wrote in message
news:GNU968085E64A190101188HaHaHoHoHeeHe@213.155.197.138...
> Zvi Netiv <support@replace_with_domain.com> wrote
>> HaHaHoHoHeeHee <HaHaHoHoHeeHee-_invalid@lycos.com> wrote
>>> Folkert Rienstra <see_reply-to@myweb.nl> wrote

>>>>> Is there any program that will actually work to
>>>>> get the files that are not accessible on this drive?

>>>>> What is the problem?

>>>> The bad sectors, probably.
>>>> It might help if you got rid of them first by running FindBad.
>>>> http://www.partitionsupport.com/fbad15.zip

>> In case the drive is dying then this would be the silliest thing to do.

> Agreed. I have done nothing to write to the drive.

>>> I do not believe their is a physical problem with the drive.
>>> It was perfect before this moron tech got his hands on it
>>> and he screwed up the logical tables, prob. FAT on the drive.
>>> The drive still makes no noise and I can access most of the files.

>> Most dying drives do not make noise.

> Not in my limited experience. Physical problems generally cause noise.

Fraid not. Most obviously with a poor electrical connection to the heads,
thats a physical problem that doesnt necessarily produce any noise.

>>> Also I ran checks on the drive b4 this idiot got his
>>> hands on it and it was perfect. What is needed is a
>>> program to find the data and rewrite to another drive.

>> What was needed was to assess whether the drive is working
>> with the correct settings, and if it did, then to clone it before
>> it develops too many bad sectors or becomes inaccessible.

> Whatever you mean by that. If cloning (assume you mean to
> the good drive) means putting my primary drive at any risk,

No, he's talking about cloning the bad drive to a third
drive while you can, before the bad drive dies completely.

> I'm not going to do that. Already got most of the data off the bad drive, it's
> the several files that were inaccessible due to read/sector errors I'm after.

Clonedisk will do that, try to get what it can out of the bad sectors.

> Diskpatch clones drives but states you have to wipe
> the destination drive to "reduce noise". Forget that.

You clone to a third drive.

>>> NONE of the so called data recovery programs work; and I don't think
>>> I want to run my good system 24 hours to see if GDB gets anything.
>>> Same for Spinrite. They are too damn slow. I think Rod's suggestion
>>> that I image the drive is a good one. I think maybe Ghost will do
>>> that and can be set to ignore the bad sector reporting. I will try
>>> it. Ghost also has an explore that allows partial restoration of
>>> files, but the last time I ran my version I could not get it to
>>> accept command line parameters that is SAYS it takes. Lots of
>>> inadequate software out there. :-(

>> The software isn't to blame here.

> Sure it is, cuz no one has created a program that actually
> does the job. They all make lofty promises, but fail on delivery.

No software can do anything much about a dying drive.

If the drive is dying, it should be cloned to a third drive while you
can and then the recovery software will work on the clone fine.
You wont see the freezing thats due to the bad sectors being retried.
Anonymous
a b G Storage
June 27, 2005 3:24:44 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

"Folkert Rienstra" <see_reply-to@myweb.nl> wrote in
news:42bdb1e2$0$62488$892e7fe2@authen.white.readfreenews.net:

> "HaHaHoHoHeeHee" <HaHaHoHoHeeHee-_invalid@lycos.com> wrote in message
> news:Ham967FA54D9DE900114539sl329HaHaHoHo@213.155.197.138
>> on 23 Jun 2005, "Folkert Rienstra" <see_reply-to@myweb.nl> wrote in
>> news:42bb3ba1$0$34273$892e7fe2@authen.white.readfreenews.net:
>>
>> > "HaHaHoHoHeeHee" HaHaHoHoHeeHee-_invalid@lycos.com> wrote in
>> > message news:Ham967E7E8FD106B0114539sl329HaHaHoHo@213.155.197.138
>> > > I would greatly appreciate any assistance on this problem.
>> > >
>> > > WD 3 gig drive, messed up by incompetent shop. Now installed on
>> > > new system as CSEL/CS (cable select) as secondary drive.
>> > >
>> > > Most files appear in explorer and are accessible, except that
>> > > many give "cannot access drive" errors.
>> > >
>> > > Using GDB, Rescue and PCIfilerecovery, none work. PCIfr appears
>> > > to freeze, Rescue does the same and GDB, while not freezing
>> > > gives a varying estimate time for the recovery process of 10-20
>> > > hours-goes extremely slowly with many err 10 read LBAs and bad
>> > > sectors.
>> > >
>> > > Scandisk gets to about 95% of the drive and then gives "finding
>> > > crosslinked sectors" and then goes back to 85%. This behavior
>> > > appears to be a continuous loop as it never gets past 95% for
>> > > like 10 minutes.
>> > >
>> > > WD diagnostic software gives "smart status failed at checkpoint
>> > > 1 and 2-contact tech support for further info.
>> > >
>> > > This is a dell xps 800 mhz dimension, win98se.
>> > >
>>
>>
>> I do not believe their is a physical problem with the drive.
>
> I didn't say there was. I said to get rid of the bad sectors first.
>
>> It was perfect before this moron tech got his hands on it and he
>> screwed up the logical tables, prob. FAT on the drive.
>
> Then there are no bad sectors, but later on you bring them up again.
> So what is it? Surely the tech didn't write bad sectors.
>
>> The drive still makes no
>> noise and I can access most of the files.
>
> This has nothing to do with the 'tables' then.
>

I never claimed to be an expert on hard drives (obviously).
So you are saying that ANY bad sector error has nothing to do with
ANY logical error, such as scrambled FAT? IOW, if GDB, for example
reports bad sectors, that HAS to be a physical problem with the drive?
I find this hard to fanthom since the rest of the drive operates
normally, does not seem to have increased bad sectors and makes no
noise. Since from your previous posting you seem to like spinrite,
does that offer anything more GDB or the others seem to offer? I have it
but have not used it due to the many reports of day+ completion times
from both reviewers and users.
Anonymous
a b G Storage
June 27, 2005 3:24:45 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

HaHaHooHooHeeHee wrote:

> "Folkert Rienstra" <see_reply-to@myweb.nl> wrote in
> news:42bdb1e2$0$62488$892e7fe2@authen.white.readfreenews.net:
>
>> "HaHaHoHoHeeHee" <HaHaHoHoHeeHee-_invalid@lycos.com> wrote in message
>> news:Ham967FA54D9DE900114539sl329HaHaHoHo@213.155.197.138
>>> on 23 Jun 2005, "Folkert Rienstra" <see_reply-to@myweb.nl> wrote in
>>> news:42bb3ba1$0$34273$892e7fe2@authen.white.readfreenews.net:
>>>
>>> > "HaHaHoHoHeeHee" HaHaHoHoHeeHee-_invalid@lycos.com> wrote in
>>> > message news:Ham967E7E8FD106B0114539sl329HaHaHoHo@213.155.197.138
>>> > > I would greatly appreciate any assistance on this problem.
>>> > >
>>> > > WD 3 gig drive, messed up by incompetent shop. Now installed on
>>> > > new system as CSEL/CS (cable select) as secondary drive.
>>> > >
>>> > > Most files appear in explorer and are accessible, except that
>>> > > many give "cannot access drive" errors.
>>> > >
>>> > > Using GDB, Rescue and PCIfilerecovery, none work. PCIfr appears
>>> > > to freeze, Rescue does the same and GDB, while not freezing
>>> > > gives a varying estimate time for the recovery process of 10-20
>>> > > hours-goes extremely slowly with many err 10 read LBAs and bad
>>> > > sectors.
>>> > >
>>> > > Scandisk gets to about 95% of the drive and then gives "finding
>>> > > crosslinked sectors" and then goes back to 85%. This behavior
>>> > > appears to be a continuous loop as it never gets past 95% for
>>> > > like 10 minutes.
>>> > >
>>> > > WD diagnostic software gives "smart status failed at checkpoint
>>> > > 1 and 2-contact tech support for further info.
>>> > >
>>> > > This is a dell xps 800 mhz dimension, win98se.
>>> > >
>>>
>>>
>>> I do not believe their is a physical problem with the drive.
>>
>> I didn't say there was. I said to get rid of the bad sectors first.
>>
>>> It was perfect before this moron tech got his hands on it and he
>>> screwed up the logical tables, prob. FAT on the drive.
>>
>> Then there are no bad sectors, but later on you bring them up again.
>> So what is it? Surely the tech didn't write bad sectors.
>>
>>> The drive still makes no
>>> noise and I can access most of the files.
>>
>> This has nothing to do with the 'tables' then.
>>
>
> I never claimed to be an expert on hard drives (obviously).
> So you are saying that ANY bad sector error has nothing to do with
> ANY logical error, such as scrambled FAT?

A bad sector can cause a scrambled FAT. A scrambled FAT cannot cause a bad
sector. On the other hand malware on your system could both scramble the
FAT and falsely report bad sectors.

> IOW, if GDB, for example
> reports bad sectors, that HAS to be a physical problem with the drive?

Unless it's the result of a bug in GDB or a false report generated by a
virus or other malware, yes.

> I find this hard to fanthom since the rest of the drive operates
> normally, does not seem to have increased bad sectors and makes no
> noise.

IDE drives have sparing. A drive can have a large number of bad sectors and
you will never see it because they have all been mapped to spare sectors.
However when the drive runs out of spares, then you'll start to see bad
sectors reported. You'll also see bad sectors that have developed since
the data was written--they're supposed to be remapped on the next write
unless the drive is out of spares mappable to that location.

> Since from your previous posting you seem to like spinrite,
> does that offer anything more GDB or the others seem to offer? I have it
> but have not used it due to the many reports of day+ completion times
> from both reviewers and users.

Spinrite basically reads or tries to read the data on a bad sector and then
rewrites it. On the old stepper motor drives where the head position
occasionally drifted this worked because it realigned the data with the
drifted heads. On IDE drives it works because it allows the drive to remap
the sector. The long completion times are the result of the number of
repetitive reads needed for it to decide that it's gotten an accurate read
off the bad sector or give up on it and move on.

Generally speaking it's better to replace the drive than to Spinrite it--if
it's degenerated to the point that Spinrite seems necessary then it's
generally not got long to live.

--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
Anonymous
a b G Storage
June 27, 2005 12:31:13 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

"HaHaHooHooHeeHee" <HaHaHooHooHeeHee@somewhere.com> wrote in message news:vb39681A6F3188DE0101101bytesAAFFlexl@213.155.197.138
> "Folkert Rienstra" <see_reply-to@myweb.nl> wrote in news:42bdb1e2$0$62488$892e7fe2@authen.white.readfreenews.net:
> > "HaHaHoHoHeeHee" HaHaHoHoHeeHee-_invalid@lycos.com> wrote in news:Ham967FA54D9DE900114539sl329HaHaHoHo@213.155.197.138
> > > on 23 Jun 2005, "Folkert Rienstra" see_reply-to@myweb.nl> wrote in
news:42bb3ba1$0$34273$892e7fe2@authen.white.readfreenews.net:
> > > > "HaHaHoHoHeeHee" HaHaHoHoHeeHee-_invalid@lycos.com> wrote in news:Ham967E7E8FD106B0114539sl329HaHaHoHo@213.155.197.138
> > > > > I would greatly appreciate any assistance on this problem.
> > > > >
> > > > > WD 3 gig drive, messed up by incompetent shop. Now installed on
> > > > > new system as CSEL/CS (cable select) as secondary drive.
> > > > >
> > > > > Most files appear in explorer and are accessible, except that
> > > > > many give "cannot access drive" errors.
> > > > >
> > > > > Using GDB, Rescue and PCIfilerecovery, none work. PCIfr appears
> > > > > to freeze, Rescue does the same and GDB, while not freezing
> > > > > gives a varying estimate time for the recovery process of 10-20
> > > > > hours-goes extremely slowly with many err 10 read LBAs and bad
> > > > > sectors.
> > > > >
> > > > > Scandisk gets to about 95% of the drive and then gives "finding
> > > > > crosslinked sectors" and then goes back to 85%. This behavior
> > > > > appears to be a continuous loop as it never gets past 95% for
> > > > > like 10 minutes.
> > > > >
> > > > > WD diagnostic software gives "smart status failed at checkpoint
> > > > > 1 and 2-contact tech support for further info.
> > > > >
> > > > > This is a dell xps 800 mhz dimension, win98se.
> > > > >
> > >
> > > I do not believe their is a physical problem with the drive.
> >
> > I didn't say there was. I said to get rid of the bad sectors first.
> >
> > > It was perfect before this moron tech got his hands on it and he
> > > screwed up the logical tables, prob. FAT on the drive.
> >
> > Then there are no bad sectors, but later on you bring them up again.
> > So what is it? Surely the tech didn't write bad sectors.
> >
> > > The drive still makes no
> > > noise and I can access most of the files.
> >
> > This has nothing to do with the 'tables' then.
> >
>
> I never claimed to be an expert on hard drives (obviously).
> So you are saying that ANY bad sector error has nothing to do with
> ANY logical error, such as scrambled FAT? IOW, if GDB, for example
> reports bad sectors, that HAS to be a physical problem with the drive?

Not necessarily physical (as in physical damage) but physical in the sense of
the computed ECC not being equal to the recorded ECC of the sector contents.
The drive will treat that as a physical bad sector until this matter with the ECCs
is resolved. That will require overwriting that sector.

> I find this hard to fanthom since the rest of the drive operates
> normally, does not seem to have increased bad sectors and makes no noise.

Well, it may be so silent that you don't actually hear it but you notice it
by it taking very very long to read.

> Since from your previous posting you seem to like spinrite,

I think you confuse me with someone else.

> does that offer anything more GDB or the others seem to offer?

Probably, if you are interested in every last bit that may possibly be retrievable.
However, if the bad sector is an incompletely written sector with definitely
wrong ECC, then that will never happen. Spinrite will try until it drops to get lucky,
to once read the bad sector with a correct ECC. Or if it gets differing results to
put together (reconstruct) the most often encountered equal parts in a new sector.
That will never happen with incompletely written sectors.

> I have it but have not used it due to the many reports of day+ completion times
> from both reviewers and users.

Yes. And if you have a drive on it's way out, that will surely kill it off.
Anonymous
a b G Storage
June 27, 2005 3:11:10 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

harveywallbanger <harveywallbanger@hotmail.com> wrote:

> Aren't you the guy who always recommends Clonedisk? Last time I tried to
> download that program, I got a "page not found" at their website.

Have you tried www.resq.co.il/download/clonedsk.exe ?

> Also, no one ever explains, that I've seen, the process of cloning and
> recovery from that. Do you clone to a secondary drive or to cd-rws or
> what? If you clone to the primary drive, will that not replace that
> drive's data with the junk data from the bad drive? How do you recover
> bad sector data from the clone?

CloneDisk is a forensics and professional data recovery tool, and requires a
separate drive, in good condition, as destination.

Data in bad/marginal sectors is recovered by multiple read attempts but there is
a limit to how long you let the cloner to dwell on a single sector. If too
long, then the drive may be dead before you finish cloning it, and if too short,
then you may lose data that could be recovered if you insisted longer. The
practical solution is a compromise between the two.

The final phase of data recovery should always be conducted on the clone.

Regards, Zvi
--
NetZ Computing Ltd. ISRAEL www.invircible.com www.ivi.co.il (Hebrew)
InVircible Virus Defense Solutions, ResQ and Data Recovery Utilities
Anonymous
a b G Storage
June 27, 2005 3:29:53 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

harveywallbanger <harveywallbanger@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Zvi Netiv wrote:

[...]

> > After having read the rest of this thread, I'm afraid that you already missed
> > the opportunity to recover anything of value from that drive.
>
> Nothing in his post states that he tried to write to the drive or fix
> errors. You seem to have alot of advice as to what the problem is, but
> little information on how to fix it? I've notice that your ResQ program
> is good for giving alot of mathematical detail and generating arguments
> in these newsgroups over what the problem with a drive is, but little,
> it seems, in the way of solutions?

Read the following thread (press "show options" when viewing)
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/comp.sys.ibm.pc.har...

Regards, Zvi
--
NetZ Computing Ltd. ISRAEL www.invircible.com www.ivi.co.il (Hebrew)
InVircible Virus Defense Solutions, ResQ and Data Recovery Utilities
Anonymous
a b G Storage
June 27, 2005 4:39:38 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

HaHaHoHoHeeHee <HaHaHoHoHeeHee-_invalid@lycos.com> wrote:
> Zvi Netiv <support@replace_with_domain.com> wrote in

[...]
> >> Most files appear in explorer and are accessible, except that many
> >> give "cannot access drive" errors.
> >
> > Typical to a mapping (geometry) error.\
>
> Thanks, but that says little or nothing.

It depends to whom. What it means is that at some stage, the drive may have
worked with different settings in the BIOS, either translation mode or
parameters, resulting in a different CHS mapping. The implications of such
event reach far.

[...]
> >> Scandisk gets to about 95% of the drive and then gives "finding
> >> crosslinked sectors" and then goes back to 85%. This behavior
> >> appears to be a continuous loop as it never gets past 95% for like
> >> 10 minutes.

This anomaly suggests that a different BIOS translation mode may have been used
with the drive.

> > Typical to a geometry error. The last thing you want to do in such
> > event is to run file system repair software (e.g. SCANDISK, CHKDSK, or
> > NDD). The latter will perpetuate the error and irreversibly corrupt
> > the file system.
>
> What harm is running scandisk if no fixing is done. Drive is not showing
> signs of disintegrating further, since the sector errors seem to be
> logical errors.

The way to assure that SCANDISK fixes nothing is to launch it from command line,
preferably from true DOS, with the /CHECKONLY switch. The fact that SCANDISK
went as far as 95% of the drive suggests that this isn't how you ran SCANDISK.

[...]
> >> Is there any program that will actually work to get the files that
> >> are not accessible on this drive? What is the problem?
> >
> > After having read the rest of this thread, I'm afraid that you already
> > missed the opportunity to recover anything of value from that drive.
>
> What makes you assume this?

Experience, observing small details, and seeing how you made the wrong choices.

At first, you failed to assess the real cause to the problem (you have been
preoccupied with blaming the technician, and then data recovery software that
aren't worth their salt), whether a corrupted file system is the cause (what you
call "logical errors"), or genuine bad sectors formed on your drive.

In the previous case (file system corruption), the course of action should have
been totally different. Unfortunately you already messed too far for DR
software to be able to recover your files.

As for the other possibility (bad sectors), you should have cloned the drive
immediately on realizing that bad sectors are at the source of the problem.
Here too, you lost precious time, and what's worse, you let changes to the drive
that you aren't even aware of, and cloning the drive now may not be worth the
effort.

Regards, Zvi
--
NetZ Computing Ltd. ISRAEL www.invircible.com www.ivi.co.il (Hebrew)
InVircible Virus Defense Solutions, ResQ and Data Recovery Utilities
Anonymous
a b G Storage
June 27, 2005 10:27:54 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

Thanks to Folkert, J. Clark and Rod Speed for their informative replies.
Especially learned from Folkert and Clark's explainations. Good think I
have alot of time to investigate all of this.

I will have to look up the ECC business, I think it has something to do
with the mfg. id?

Does anyone know if there are any other programs besides clonedisk and
drivepatch that attempt to recover bad sectors in DOS? I've read reviews
on diskpatch and they are mixed. Makers of clonedisk's web page is not
very friendly-difficult/impossible to dl a trial. Restorer2000 only
works in Windoze.

I like the diskpatch feature of adjustable reads on bad sectors. I think
you might be able to do this with Sprinrite also, but not sure. Zillions
of programs out there, but none seem superior to all the others.



"Folkert Rienstra" <see_reply-to@myweb.nl> wrote in
news:42bf9d58$0$62505$892e7fe2@authen.white.readfreenews.net:

> "HaHaHooHooHeeHee" <HaHaHooHooHeeHee@somewhere.com> wrote in message
> news:vb39681A6F3188DE0101101bytesAAFFlexl@213.155.197.138
>> "Folkert Rienstra" <see_reply-to@myweb.nl> wrote in
>> news:42bdb1e2$0$62488$892e7fe2@authen.white.readfreenews.net:
>> > "HaHaHoHoHeeHee" HaHaHoHoHeeHee-_invalid@lycos.com> wrote in
>> > news:Ham967FA54D9DE900114539sl329HaHaHoHo@213.155.197.138
>> > > on 23 Jun 2005, "Folkert Rienstra" see_reply-to@myweb.nl> wrote
>> > > in
> news:42bb3ba1$0$34273$892e7fe2@authen.white.readfreenews.net:
>> > > > "HaHaHoHoHeeHee" HaHaHoHoHeeHee-_invalid@lycos.com> wrote in
>> > > > news:Ham967E7E8FD106B0114539sl329HaHaHoHo@213.155.197.138
>> > > > > I would greatly appreciate any assistance on this problem.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > WD 3 gig drive, messed up by incompetent shop. Now installed
>> > > > > on new system as CSEL/CS (cable select) as secondary drive.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Most files appear in explorer and are accessible, except that
>> > > > > many give "cannot access drive" errors.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Using GDB, Rescue and PCIfilerecovery, none work. PCIfr
>> > > > > appears to freeze, Rescue does the same and GDB, while not
>> > > > > freezing gives a varying estimate time for the recovery
>> > > > > process of 10-20 hours-goes extremely slowly with many err 10
>> > > > > read LBAs and bad sectors.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Scandisk gets to about 95% of the drive and then gives
>> > > > > "finding crosslinked sectors" and then goes back to 85%. This
>> > > > > behavior appears to be a continuous loop as it never gets
>> > > > > past 95% for like 10 minutes.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > WD diagnostic software gives "smart status failed at
>> > > > > checkpoint 1 and 2-contact tech support for further info.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > This is a dell xps 800 mhz dimension, win98se.
>> > > > >
>> > >
>> > > I do not believe their is a physical problem with the drive.
>> >
>> > I didn't say there was. I said to get rid of the bad sectors first.
>> >
>> > > It was perfect before this moron tech got his hands on it and he
>> > > screwed up the logical tables, prob. FAT on the drive.
>> >
>> > Then there are no bad sectors, but later on you bring them up
>> > again. So what is it? Surely the tech didn't write bad sectors.
>> >
>> > > The drive still makes no
>> > > noise and I can access most of the files.
>> >
>> > This has nothing to do with the 'tables' then.
>> >
>>
>> I never claimed to be an expert on hard drives (obviously).
>> So you are saying that ANY bad sector error has nothing to do with
>> ANY logical error, such as scrambled FAT? IOW, if GDB, for example
>> reports bad sectors, that HAS to be a physical problem with the
>> drive?
>
> Not necessarily physical (as in physical damage) but physical in the
> sense of the computed ECC not being equal to the recorded ECC of the
> sector contents. The drive will treat that as a physical bad sector
> until this matter with the ECCs is resolved. That will require
> overwriting that sector.
>
>> I find this hard to fanthom since the rest of the drive operates
>> normally, does not seem to have increased bad sectors and makes no
>> noise.
>
> Well, it may be so silent that you don't actually hear it but you
> notice it by it taking very very long to read.
>
>> Since from your previous posting you seem to like spinrite,
>
> I think you confuse me with someone else.
>
>> does that offer anything more GDB or the others seem to offer?
>
> Probably, if you are interested in every last bit that may possibly be
> retrievable. However, if the bad sector is an incompletely written
> sector with definitely wrong ECC, then that will never happen.
> Spinrite will try until it drops to get lucky, to once read the bad
> sector with a correct ECC. Or if it gets differing results to put
> together (reconstruct) the most often encountered equal parts in a new
> sector. That will never happen with incompletely written sectors.
>
>> I have it but have not used it due to the many reports of day+
>> completion times from both reviewers and users.
>
> Yes. And if you have a drive on it's way out, that will surely kill it
> off.
>
>
June 28, 2005 1:29:07 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

On Mon, 27 Jun 2005 18:27:54 +0000 (UTC), HaHaHooHooHeeHee
<HaHaHooHooHeeHee@somewhere.com> wrote:

>Thanks to Rod Speed

If you pay any attention to this notorious troll, you will suffer the
consequences.

You have been warned.

--

Map of the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy
http://home.houston.rr.com/rkba/vrwc.html

"The possession of arms is the distinction
between a free man and a slave."
-- Andrew Fletcher, Discourse on Government (1695)
Anonymous
a b G Storage
June 28, 2005 1:41:42 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

Zvi Netiv <support@replace_with_domain.com> wrote in
news:b9evb1h73s94h58f4ioi7ije2ioqm5dq31@4ax.com:

> HaHaHoHoHeeHee <HaHaHoHoHeeHee-_invalid@lycos.com> wrote:
>> Zvi Netiv <support@replace_with_domain.com> wrote in
>
> [...]
>> >> Most files appear in explorer and are accessible, except that many
>> >> give "cannot access drive" errors.
>> >
>> > Typical to a mapping (geometry) error.\
>>
>> Thanks, but that says little or nothing.
>
> It depends to whom. What it means is that at some stage, the drive
> may have worked with different settings in the BIOS, either
> translation mode or parameters, resulting in a different CHS mapping.
> The implications of such event reach far.
>
> [...]
>> >> Scandisk gets to about 95% of the drive and then gives "finding
>> >> crosslinked sectors" and then goes back to 85%. This behavior
>> >> appears to be a continuous loop as it never gets past 95% for like
>> >> 10 minutes.
>
> This anomaly suggests that a different BIOS translation mode may have
> been used with the drive.

You're right about this, and probably only this. The imbecile tech
(maybe you know him?) probably installed the drive wrongly and forced it
to write incorrectly. Not to worry, I already have a solution that will
work in court. I have most of my data and I will recover my time and
costs in Court.

>
>> > Typical to a geometry error. The last thing you want to do in such
>> > event is to run file system repair software (e.g. SCANDISK, CHKDSK,
>> > or NDD). The latter will perpetuate the error and irreversibly
>> > corrupt the file system.
>>
>> What harm is running scandisk if no fixing is done. Drive is not
>> showing signs of disintegrating further, since the sector errors seem
>> to be logical errors.
>
> The way to assure that SCANDISK fixes nothing is to launch it from
> command line, preferably from true DOS, with the /CHECKONLY switch.
> The fact that SCANDISK went as far as 95% of the drive suggests that
> this isn't how you ran SCANDISK.
>
> [...]
>> >> Is there any program that will actually work to get the files that
>> >> are not accessible on this drive? What is the problem?
>> >
>> > After having read the rest of this thread, I'm afraid that you
>> > already missed the opportunity to recover anything of value from
>> > that drive.
>>
>> What makes you assume this?
>
> Experience, observing small details, and seeing how you made the wrong
> choices.
>
> At first, you failed to assess the real cause to the problem (you have
> been preoccupied with blaming the technician, and then data recovery
> software that aren't worth their salt), whether a corrupted file
> system is the cause (what you call "logical errors"), or genuine bad
> sectors formed on your drive.
>
> In the previous case (file system corruption), the course of action
> should have been totally different. Unfortunately you already messed
> too far for DR software to be able to recover your files.
>
> As for the other possibility (bad sectors), you should have cloned the
> drive immediately on realizing that bad sectors are at the source of
> the problem. Here too, you lost precious time, and what's worse, you
> let changes to the drive that you aren't even aware of, and cloning
> the drive now may not be worth the effort.

Not preoccupied with anything. I have LOTS of time. In fact, I have a
year to sue, so there is no rush. I made no changes to the drive. So you
are saying that scandisk run from windows writes to the drive, changes
it even BEFORE it asks you to fix anything. I rather doubt that. The
other DR programs did nothing except start to scan the drive. The drive
has developed no further errors since I've done any of this. And, rest
assured I won't be using your program clonedisk. Apparently you are
unaware you have MANY competitors and people don't have to beg at your
web page to get a copy of clonedisk. Instead of trying to impress
everyone with you obtuse knowledge (or is mostly BS, I suspect) you
should concentrate on helping those at ResQ make their web page a little
easier to navigate and more competitive with other better pages selling
the same type of products. I think I understand your reasoning though.
It runs something like this: don't do anything to the drive until you
buy our product clonedisk.

>
> Regards, Zvi
> --
> NetZ Computing Ltd. ISRAEL www.invircible.com www.ivi.co.il (Hebrew)
> InVircible Virus Defense Solutions, ResQ and Data Recovery Utilities
>
Anonymous
a b G Storage
June 28, 2005 1:43:27 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

Thanks for the warning. I know all about Rod. I see he is exercising
more restraint lately and I did find his information, while cryptic,
useful.

spam@uce.gov (Bob) wrote in
news:42c06f88.5019000@news-server.houston.rr.com:

> On Mon, 27 Jun 2005 18:27:54 +0000 (UTC), HaHaHooHooHeeHee
> <HaHaHooHooHeeHee@somewhere.com> wrote:
>
>>Thanks to Rod Speed
>
> If you pay any attention to this notorious troll, you will suffer the
> consequences.
>
> You have been warned.
>
Anonymous
a b G Storage
June 28, 2005 4:24:45 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

"HaHaHooHooHeeHee" <HaHaHooHooHeeHee@somewhere.com> wrote in message news:vb39682749ACF45EHaHaHooHooHeeHeesome@213.155.197.138
> Thanks to Folkert, J. Clark and Rod Speed for their informative replies.
> Especially learned from Folkert and Clark's explanations. Good think I
> have a lot of time to investigate all of this.
>
> I will have to look up the ECC business, I think it has something to do
> with the mfg. id?

Nope.

It's an Error Correction Code check that is performed on and recorded
with the sector data.
On a read an ECC is calculated for the data and compared with the ECC
that is recorded with the data. If they don't match or if the ECC can't
correct the data such that it returns the same ECC, then the sector is
considered bad.

>
> Does anyone know if there are any other programs besides clonedisk and
> drivepatch that attempt to recover bad sectors in DOS?

They do? Drives already do it themselves. What programs can do is
repeat a read themselves if it doesn't succeed a first time.

> I've read reviews on diskpatch and they are mixed.

Doesn't surprise me one bit. The author has a habit of blowing up if you
make suggestions, taking it as criticism. That obviously limits that programs
ability to get better.

Netiv isn't much better and ignores/ridicules any suggestions.

> Makers of clonedisk's web page is not very friendly-difficult/impossible
> to dl a trial. Restorer2000 only works in Windoze.
>
> I like the diskpatch feature of adjustable reads on bad sectors.

Does it do reads without ECC checks (Read Long)?
I.E. no retries at all, not even by the drive itself?

Oh well, here is an excerpt from the online manual:

" In case of bad sectors, often repairs can not be made on the original (bad) disk.
" If bad sectors exist in areas on the disk that contain disk structures, repairing
" these structures is going to be impossible

" because writing to bad sectors is impossible.

That is wrong.

" Cloning the bad disk to a good disk will give you a much better chance of repairing
" those damaged structures.

Maybe so but not for that reason.

" Be prepared for the fact that cloning a bad disk to a good disk can take a
" considerable amount of time.

And kiss the disk goodbye for that reason alone.

> I think you might be able to do this with Spinrite also, but not sure. Zillions
> of programs out there, but none seem superior to all the others.

" In case of bad sectors, often repairs can not be made on the original (bad) disk.
" If bad sectors exist in areas on the disk that contain disk structures, repairing
" these structures is going to be impossible

" because writing to bad sectors is impossible.

That is wrong.

" Cloning the bad disk to a good disk will give you a much better chance of repairing
" those damaged structures.

Maybe so but not for that reason.

" Be prepared for the fact that cloning a bad disk to a good disk can take a
" considerable amount of time.

And kiss the disk goodbye for that reason alone.


>
>
>
> "Folkert Rienstra" <see_reply-to@myweb.nl> wrote in news:42bf9d58$0$62505$892e7fe2@authen.white.readfreenews.net:
> > "HaHaHooHooHeeHee" HaHaHooHooHeeHee@somewhere.com> wrote in message news:vb39681A6F3188DE0101101bytesAAFFlexl@213.155.197.138
> > > "Folkert Rienstra" see_reply-to@myweb.nl> wrote in news:42bdb1e2$0$62488$892e7fe2@authen.white.rReadfreenews.net:
> > > > "HaHaHoHoHeeHee" HaHaHoHoHeeHee-_invalid@lycos.com> wrote in news:Ham967FA54D9DE900114539sl329HaHaHoHo@213.155.197.138
> > > > > on 23 Jun 2005, "Folkert Rienstra" see_reply-to@myweb.nl> wrote in
news:42bb3ba1$0$34273$892e7fe2@authen.white.rReadfreenews.net:
> > > > > > "HaHaHoHoHeeHee" HaHaHoHoHeeHee-_invalid@lycos.com> wrote in news:Ham967E7E8FD106B0114539sl329HaHaHoHo@213.155.197.138
> > > > > > > I would greatly appreciate any assistance on this problem.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > WD 3 gig drive, messed up by incompetent shop. Now installed
> > > > > > > on new system as CSEL/CS (cable select) as secondary drive.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Most files appear in explorer and are accessible, except that
> > > > > > > many give "cannot access drive" errors.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Using GDB, Rescue and PCIfilerecovery, none work. PCIfr
> > > > > > > appears to freeze, Rescue does the same and GDB, while not
> > > > > > > freezing gives a varying estimate time for the recovery
> > > > > > > process of 10-20 hours-goes extremely slowly with many err 10
> > > > > > > read LBAs and bad sectors.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Scandisk gets to about 95% of the drive and then gives
> > > > > > > "finding crosslinked sectors" and then goes back to 85%. This
> > > > > > > behavior appears to be a continuous loop as it never gets
> > > > > > > past 95% for like 10 minutes.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > WD diagnostic software gives "smart status failed at
> > > > > > > checkpoint 1 and 2-contact tech support for further info.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > This is a dell xps 800 mhz dimension, win98se.
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > I do not believe their is a physical problem with the drive.
> > > >
> > > > I didn't say there was. I said to get rid of the bad sectors first.
> > > >
> > > > > It was perfect before this moron tech got his hands on it and he
> > > > > screwed up the logical tables, prob. FAT on the drive.
> > > >
> > > > Then there are no bad sectors, but later on you bring them up
> > > > again. So what is it? Surely the tech didn't write bad sectors.
> > > >
> > > > > The drive still makes no
> > > > > noise and I can access most of the files.
> > > >
> > > > This has nothing to do with the 'tables' then.
> > > >
> > >
> > > I never claimed to be an expert on hard drives (obviously).
> > > So you are saying that ANY bad sector error has nothing to do with
> > > ANY logical error, such as scrambled FAT? IOW, if GDB, for example
> > > reports bad sectors, that HAS to be a physical problem with the
> > > drive?
> >
> > Not necessarily physical (as in physical damage) but physical in the
> > sense of the computed ECC not being equal to the recorded ECC of the
> > sector contents. The drive will treat that as a physical bad sector
> > until this matter with the ECCs is resolved. That will require
> > overwriting that sector.
> >
> > > I find this hard to fathom since the rest of the drive operates
> > > normally, does not seem to have increased bad sectors and makes no
> > > noise.
> >
> > Well, it may be so silent that you don't actually hear it but you
> > notice it by it taking very very long to read.
> >
> > > Since from your previous posting you seem to like Spinrite,
> >
> > I think you confuse me with someone else.
> >
> > > does that offer anything more GDB or the others seem to offer?
> >
> > Probably, if you are interested in every last bit that may possibly be
> > retrievable. However, if the bad sector is an incompletely written
> > sector with definitely wrong ECC, then that will never happen.
> > Spinrite will try until it drops to get lucky, to once read the bad
> > sector with a correct ECC. Or if it gets differing results to put
> > together (reconstruct) the most often encountered equal parts in a new
> > sector. That will never happen with incompletely written sectors.
> >
> > > I have it but have not used it due to the many reports of day+
> > > completion times from both reviewers and users.
> >
> > Yes. And if you have a drive on it's way out, that will surely kill it
> > off.
Anonymous
a b G Storage
June 28, 2005 4:26:58 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

"Zvi Netiv" <support@replace_with_domain.com> wrote in message news:b9evb1h73s94h58f4ioi7ije2ioqm5dq31@4ax.com
> HaHaHoHoHeeHee <HaHaHoHoHeeHee-_invalid@lycos.com> wrote:
> > Zvi Netiv <support@replace_with_domain.com> wrote in
>
> [...]
> > > > Most files appear in explorer and are accessible, except that many
> > > > give "cannot access drive" errors.
> > >
> > > Typical to a mapping (geometry) error.
> >
> > Thanks, but that says little or nothing.
>
> It depends to whom. What it means is that at some stage, the drive may have
> worked with different settings in the BIOS, either translation mode or
> parameters, resulting in a different CHS mapping.
> The implications of such event reach far.

Only if the drive is accessed in CHS mode, and that software is using
CHS directly, without converting it to LBA first and then back to the
CHS translation in actual use. That is doubtful.

>
> [...]
> > > > Scandisk gets to about 95% of the drive and then gives "finding
> > > > crosslinked sectors" and then goes back to 85%. This behavior
> > > > appears to be a continuous loop as it never gets past 95% for like
> > > > 10 minutes.
>
> This anomaly suggests that a different BIOS translation mode may have been used
> with the drive.

And what exactly in that behavior suggests that?

>
> > > Typical to a geometry error. The last thing you want to do in such
> > > event is to run file system repair software (e.g. SCANDISK, CHKDSK, or
> > > NDD). The latter will perpetuate the error and irreversibly corrupt
> > > the file system.
> >
> > What harm is running scandisk if no fixing is done.

Well , Netiv?

> > Drive is not showing signs of disintegrating further, since the sector errors seem to be
> > logical errors.
>
> The way to assure that SCANDISK fixes nothing is to launch it from command line,
> preferably from true DOS, with the /CHECKONLY switch. The fact that SCANDISK
> went as far as 95% of the drive suggests that this isn't how you ran SCANDISK.

The question was: What harm is running scandisk if no fixing is done?

>
> [...]
> > > > Is there any program that will actually work to get the files that
> > > > are not accessible on this drive? What is the problem?
> > >
> > > After having read the rest of this thread, I'm afraid that you already
> > > missed the opportunity to recover anything of value from that drive.
> >
> > What makes you assume this?
>
> Experience, observing small details,

Or just your usual stop word: Something is wrong, therefore it's a bios problem.

> and seeing how you made the wrong choices.
>
> At first, you failed to assess the real cause to the problem

So where is *your* suggestion for assessment, Netiv?

> (you have been preoccupied with blaming the technician, and then data
> recovery software that aren't worth their salt), whether a corrupted
> file system is the cause (what you call "logical errors"),

Actually he has still explained not what he calls "logical errors".
For all we know he may call that logical bad blocks.

> or genuine bad sectors formed on your drive.
>
> In the previous case (file system corruption), the course of action should have
> been totally different. Unfortunately you already messed too far for DR
> software to be able to recover your files.

That depends on how much of his unrecovered data is overwritten by incorrect
corrections. Those are likely to happen to the system area, not the data area.

>
> As for the other possibility (bad sectors), you should have cloned the drive
> immediately on realizing that bad sectors are at the source of the problem.

So what is it, Netiv, bad bios params or bad sectors?

> Here too, you lost precious time, and what's worse, you let changes to the drive
> that you aren't even aware of,

Which is not a problem if it is indeed bad sectors and not a translation difference.

> and cloning the drive now may not be worth the effort.

Which has more to do with the quality of cloning programs including
your own, that can't read a bad sector without causing retries.

>
> Regards, Zvi
Anonymous
a b G Storage
June 28, 2005 4:29:06 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

"HaHaHooHooHeeHee" <HaHaHooHooHeeHee@somewhere.com> wrote in message news:vb3968295E50F280HaHaHooHooHeeHeesome@213.155.197.138
> Thanks for the warning. I know all about Rod.
> I see he is exercising more restraint lately

Pun intended, I hope.

> and I did find his information, while cryptic, useful.
>
> spam@uce.gov (Bob) wrote in news:42c06f88.5019000@news-server.houston.rr.com:
>
> > On Mon, 27 Jun 2005 18:27:54 +0000 (UTC), HaHaHooHooHeeHee <HaHaHooHooHeeHee@somewhere.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Thanks to Rod Speed
> >
> > If you pay any attention to this notorious troll, you will suffer the consequences.
> >
> > You have been warned.
Anonymous
a b G Storage
June 28, 2005 12:17:18 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

Some pathetically senile silly old redneck fart desperately cowering behind
Bob <spam@uce.gov> desperately attempted to
bullshit its way out of its predicament in message
news:42bfb401.70192984@news-server.houston.rr.com...
and fooled absolutely no one at all. As always.
Anonymous
a b G Storage
June 28, 2005 3:34:10 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

HaHaHooHooHeeHee <HaHaHooHooHeeHee@somewhere.com> wrote:
> Zvi Netiv <support@replace_with_domain.com> wrote in

> > [...]
> >> >> Scandisk gets to about 95% of the drive and then gives "finding
> >> >> crosslinked sectors" and then goes back to 85%. This behavior
> >> >> appears to be a continuous loop as it never gets past 95% for like
> >> >> 10 minutes.
> >
> > This anomaly suggests that a different BIOS translation mode may have
> > been used with the drive.
>
> You're right about this, and probably only this. The imbecile tech
> (maybe you know him?) probably installed the drive wrongly and forced it
> to write incorrectly. Not to worry, I already have a solution that will
> work in court. I have most of my data and I will recover my time and
> costs in Court.

From the few times that I appeared in court for expert witnessing, I suspect
that you have ruined your evidence already, by your own hands. According to the
best evidence rule procedure, your drive state and content cannot serve anymore
as evidence in court.

Also, from the sequence of events, it's very likely that who set the drive
improperly in the BIOS is you.

[...]
> > As for the other possibility (bad sectors), you should have cloned the
> > drive immediately on realizing that bad sectors are at the source of
> > the problem. Here too, you lost precious time, and what's worse, you
> > let changes to the drive that you aren't even aware of, and cloning
> > the drive now may not be worth the effort.
>
> Not preoccupied with anything. I have LOTS of time. In fact, I have a
> year to sue, so there is no rush. I made no changes to the drive.

That's what you think. You are obviously wrong.

> So you
> are saying that scandisk run from windows writes to the drive, changes
> it even BEFORE it asks you to fix anything. I rather doubt that.

It's likely that Windows wrote to the drive, even before initiating SCANDISK.
Moreover, I suspect that SCANDISK could reach 95% of the drive without letting
it to fix anything.

> The
> other DR programs did nothing except start to scan the drive. The drive
> has developed no further errors since I've done any of this. And, rest
> assured I won't be using your program clonedisk.

In case you have a comprehension problem with the English language, let me
repeat that IMO, there is no point in cloning your drive anymore.

Regards, Zvi
--
NetZ Computing Ltd. ISRAEL www.invircible.com www.ivi.co.il (Hebrew)
InVircible Virus Defense Solutions, ResQ and Data Recovery Utilities
June 28, 2005 5:11:36 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

On Tue, 28 Jun 2005 08:17:18 +1000, "Rod Speed" <rod_speed@yahoo.com>
wrote:

>Some pathetically senile silly old redneck fart desperately cowering behind
>Bob <spam@uce.gov> desperately attempted to
>bullshit its way out of its predicament in message
>news:42bfb401.70192984@news-server.houston.rr.com...
>and fooled absolutely no one at all. As always.

Yet another datum point confirming my claim that Troll Rodboy is a
robot. He says the same exact thing over and over and over...


--

Map of the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy
http://home.houston.rr.com/rkba/vrwc.html

"The possession of arms is the distinction
between a free man and a slave."
-- Andrew Fletcher, Discourse on Government (1695)
Anonymous
a b G Storage
June 29, 2005 5:21:23 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

on 27 Jun 2005, "Folkert Rienstra" <see_reply-to@myweb.nl> wrote
in news:42c0a49d$0$13475$892e7fe2@authen.white.readfreenews.net:

> "HaHaHooHooHeeHee" <HaHaHooHooHeeHee@somewhere.com> wrote in
> message
> news:vb3968295E50F280HaHaHooHooHeeHeesome@213.155.197.138
>> Thanks for the warning. I know all about Rod.
>> I see he is exercising more restraint lately
>
> Pun intended, I hope.

Haha, Fokert, did not even notice that till you pointed it out.

Thanks for your other post on ECC and the rest. I am learning
slowly. I was wondering how long it would be before the thread
turned into several flame wars, which seems to be the habit in
this group, haha. Not that I'm adverse to a few good flame wars.

I've researched many of the programs and have yet to find one that
stands above the others. Wrote S.G. on spinrite and he cannot
offer a reasonable explaination/solution to the long recover times
with that program. Nobody seems to have come up with a really good
solution to getting the stuff off of "bad sector" drives. (don't
have time to become a math whiz worst subject) to manually analyze
the drive and it seems that those who try this are always arguing
about how to do it anyways. Have you looked at the web page for
Virtualabs. I wonder if they are any good; I bet they are
expensive-novel approach though.



>
>> and I did find his information, while cryptic, useful.
>>
>> spam@uce.gov (Bob) wrote in
>> news:42c06f88.5019000@news-server.houston.rr.com:
>>
>> > On Mon, 27 Jun 2005 18:27:54 +0000 (UTC), HaHaHooHooHeeHee
>> > <HaHaHooHooHeeHee@somewhere.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > > Thanks to Rod Speed
>> >
>> > If you pay any attention to this notorious troll, you will
>> > suffer the consequences.
>> >
>> > You have been warned.
Anonymous
a b G Storage
June 29, 2005 4:37:03 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

HaHaHoHoHeeHee <HaHaHoHoHeeHee-_invalid@lycos.com> wrote:
> on 28 Jun 2005, Zvi Netiv <support@replace_with_domain.com> wrote

> > According to the best evidence rule
> > procedure, your drive state and content cannot serve anymore as
> > evidence in court.

> Mark my words this guy will pay.

Mark mine: You'll be wasting money on lawyers, and lose the case if stupid
enough to take it to court.

> > Also, from the sequence of events, it's very likely that who set
> > the drive improperly in the BIOS is you.
>
> Tell your incompetent tech friend to get ready for some pay back.
> I underestimated his stupidity;

How about your own?

[...]
> >> Not preoccupied with anything. I have LOTS of time. In fact, I
> >> have a year to sue, so there is no rush. I made no changes to
> >> the drive.
> >
> > That's what you think. You are obviously wrong.
>
> Statute time limitations are min. one year here and in some cases
> 3 yrs. Already checked with an attorney on this.

I wasn't referring to the time limitation but failing to prove that the damage
wasn't self-inflicted by your own doing.

[...]
> > In case you have a comprehension problem with the English
> > language, let me repeat that IMO, there is no point in cloning
> > your drive anymore.
>
> Since your mostly here to hype another inadequate program, kindly
> bugger off. I don't need your advice. Capiche?

You are wrong on both counts. I am here for the benefit of users that may have
a similar problem to yours.

Regards, Zvi
--
NetZ Computing Ltd. ISRAEL www.invircible.com www.ivi.co.il (Hebrew)
InVircible Virus Defense Solutions, ResQ and Data Recovery Utilities
July 4, 2005 3:16:19 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

"Folkert Rienstra" <see_reply-to@myweb.nl> wrote in message
news:42c08a99$0$65640$892e7fe2@authen.white.readfreenews.net...
> "HaHaHooHooHeeHee" <HaHaHooHooHeeHee@somewhere.com> wrote in message
news:vb39682749ACF45EHaHaHooHooHeeHeesome@213.155.197.138
> > Thanks to Folkert, J. Clark and Rod Speed for their informative replies.
> > Especially learned from Folkert and Clark's explanations. Good think I
> > have a lot of time to investigate all of this.
> >
> > I will have to look up the ECC business, I think it has something to do
> > with the mfg. id?
>
> Nope.
>
> It's an Error Correction Code check that is performed on and recorded
> with the sector data.
> On a read an ECC is calculated for the data and compared with the ECC
> that is recorded with the data. If they don't match or if the ECC can't
> correct the data such that it returns the same ECC, then the sector is
> considered bad.
>
> >
> > Does anyone know if there are any other programs besides clonedisk and
> > drivepatch that attempt to recover bad sectors in DOS?
>
> They do? Drives already do it themselves. What programs can do is
> repeat a read themselves if it doesn't succeed a first time.

Note that read failures aren't caused by 'bad sectors' by definition. We
often see disks that aren't easily read for other reasons in which case
re-reads are often succesfull.

>
> > I've read reviews on diskpatch and they are mixed.
>
> Doesn't surprise me one bit. The author has a habit of blowing up if you
> make suggestions, taking it as criticism. That obviously limits that
programs
> ability to get better.
>

Mixed reviews can be better explained than by what you suggest here.
Obviously DiskPatch will not always be able to clone a disk, often it can
though. So this easily explains mixed reviews, some were able to clone the
disk, some were not. Note that it is very unlikely that if DiskPatch can not
clone a disk, other programs can.

It is true that specifically your (F. Rienstra) critisisms and/or
suggestions are not welcome because of your 'style' or better said, lack of
it. But it is a mistake to assume that suggestions made by others aren't
carefully considered. I also like to add that cisticism or suggestions
aren't valid or good suggestions by definition.

>
> Does it do reads without ECC checks (Read Long)?
> I.E. no retries at all, not even by the drive itself?
>
> Oh well, here is an excerpt from the online manual:
>
> " In case of bad sectors, often repairs can not be made on the original
(bad) disk.
> " If bad sectors exist in areas on the disk that contain disk structures,
repairing
> " these structures is going to be impossible
>
> " because writing to bad sectors is impossible.
>
> That is wrong.

There are conditions that will prevent a sector from being written to.

>
> " Cloning the bad disk to a good disk will give you a much better chance
of repairing
> " those damaged structures.
>
> Maybe so but not for that reason.

Yes, for that reason. If a sector can not be written to it is obviously
impossible to write correct data to the sector.

>
> " Be prepared for the fact that cloning a bad disk to a good disk can take
a
> " considerable amount of time.
>
> And kiss the disk goodbye for that reason alone.

Well, cloning is often the last thing to try if a disk can not be written
to, if file recovery tools stall, and if expensive commercial data recovery
isn't an option. To get the data you have to at least try to read the disk.
Reading all sectors does take time, it is as simple as that. How would you
try to recover the data while not reading the disk at all?

Anyway, many people have been using and have been able to recover intact
data once they cloned the disk with DiskPatch with file recovery software,
where the file recovery software would 'stall' on the original disk due to
read problems. You make it sound as if cloning a disk will by definition
kill the original disk, let me tell you from real-life experience that, that
ain't so.

--
Joep

D I Y D a t a R e c o v e r y . N L - Data & Disaster Recovery Tools

http://www.diydatarecovery.nl
http://www.diydatarecovery.com
Anonymous
a b G Storage
July 4, 2005 7:53:57 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

"Joep" <available@request.nl> wrote:
> "Folkert Rienstra" <see_reply-to@myweb.nl> wrote in message

[...]
> > " Be prepared for the fact that cloning a bad disk to a good disk can take a
> > " considerable amount of time.
> >
> > And kiss the disk goodbye for that reason alone.

Clueless and bad advice.

> Well, cloning is often the last thing to try if a disk can not be written
> to, if file recovery tools stall, and if expensive commercial data recovery
> isn't an option.

Cloning is the first thing to try if a disk starts showing bad sectors, the OS
fails to load, especially if followed by an error message about disk read/write
problems, or if reading the drive fails and the PC hangs on disk retries.

[...]
> You make it sound as if cloning a disk will by definition
> kill the original disk, let me tell you from real-life experience that, that
> ain't so.

Ignore the fool, his head is too full of theories and his own s**t. If cloning
wouldn't work, then file recovery is already hopeless.

Regards, Zvi
--
NetZ Computing Ltd. ISRAEL www.invircible.com www.ivi.co.il (Hebrew)
InVircible Virus Defense Solutions, ResQ and Data Recovery Utilities
Anonymous
a b G Storage
July 4, 2005 7:53:58 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

Zvi Netiv wrote:

> "Joep" <available@request.nl> wrote:
>> "Folkert Rienstra" <see_reply-to@myweb.nl> wrote in message
>
> [...]
>> > " Be prepared for the fact that cloning a bad disk to a good disk can
>> > take a " considerable amount of time.
>> >
>> > And kiss the disk goodbye for that reason alone.
>
> Clueless and bad advice.
>
>> Well, cloning is often the last thing to try if a disk can not be written
>> to, if file recovery tools stall, and if expensive commercial data
>> recovery isn't an option.
>
> Cloning is the first thing to try if a disk starts showing bad sectors,
> the OS fails to load, especially if followed by an error message about
> disk read/write problems, or if reading the drive fails and the PC hangs
> on disk retries.
>
> [...]
>> You make it sound as if cloning a disk will by definition
>> kill the original disk, let me tell you from real-life experience that,
>> that ain't so.
>
> Ignore the fool, his head is too full of theories and his own s**t. If
> cloning wouldn't work, then file recovery is already hopeless.

Depends on what's wrong with the drive. If it's an electronic problem then
attempting a clone is fairly safe. If it's a physical crash then there is
probably some loose material inside the capsule and possibly a physically
damaged head. If that is the case then attempting to clone the drive just
gives that loose material time to damage the other head and if there is a
damaged head, sweeping it across the surface of the platter once will
pretty much destroy the contents of that platter. And until the drive is
opened in a clean room and physically inspected there's no way to be sure
that that is not the problem.

And before you say "it can't happen", I've seen it twice so far, and I don't
count myself as having particularly vast exposure to such things.

> Regards, Zvi
> --
> NetZ Computing Ltd. ISRAEL www.invircible.com www.ivi.co.il (Hebrew)
> InVircible Virus Defense Solutions, ResQ and Data Recovery Utilities

--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
Anonymous
a b G Storage
July 5, 2005 4:07:04 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

"J. Clarke" <jclarke.usenet@snet.net.invalid> wrote:
> Zvi Netiv wrote:
> > "Joep" <available@request.nl> wrote:
> >> "Folkert Rienstra" <see_reply-to@myweb.nl> wrote in message

> > [...]
> >> > " Be prepared for the fact that cloning a bad disk to a good disk can
> >> > take a " considerable amount of time.
> >> >
> >> > And kiss the disk goodbye for that reason alone.
> >
> > Clueless bad advice.
> >
> >> Well, cloning is often the last thing to try if a disk can not be written
> >> to, if file recovery tools stall, and if expensive commercial data
> >> recovery isn't an option.
> >
> > Cloning is the first thing to try if a disk starts showing bad sectors,
> > the OS fails to load, especially if followed by an error message about
> > disk read/write problems, or if reading the drive fails and the PC hangs
> > on disk retries.
> >
> > [...]
> >> You make it sound as if cloning a disk will by definition
> >> kill the original disk, let me tell you from real-life experience that,
> >> that ain't so.
> >
> > Ignore the fool, his head is too full of theories and his own s**t. If
> > cloning wouldn't work, then file recovery is already hopeless.
>
> Depends on what's wrong with the drive. If it's an electronic problem then
> attempting a clone is fairly safe.

Joep already restricted the scope of this discussion to "a disk can not be
written to, if file recovery tools stall, and if expensive commercial data
recovery isn't an option." I further limited my advice to the conditions
described in the fifth paragraph from top.

> If it's a physical crash then there is
> probably some loose material inside the capsule and possibly a physically
> damaged head. If that is the case then attempting to clone the drive just
> gives that loose material time to damage the other head and if there is a
> damaged head, sweeping it across the surface of the platter once will
> pretty much destroy the contents of that platter.

True, but out of context under the limitations described above.

> And until the drive is
> opened in a clean room and physically inspected there's no way to be sure
> that that is not the problem.

Again, we aren't discussing a general case but specific ones. As Joep
specified, above: "and if expensive commercial data recovery isn't an option."

Regards, Zvi
--
NetZ Computing Ltd. ISRAEL www.invircible.com www.ivi.co.il (Hebrew)
InVircible Virus Defense Solutions, ResQ and Data Recovery Utilities
Anonymous
a b G Storage
July 6, 2005 4:47:02 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

"Zvi Netiv" <support@replace_with_domain.com> wrote in message news:q0bic1p4ihgsp6oqk9ohp7ti2fr6s5dokf@4ax.com
> "Joep" <available@request.nl> wrote:
> > "Folkert Rienstra" <see_reply-to@myweb.nl> wrote in message
>
> [...]
> > > " Be prepared for the fact that cloning a bad disk to a good disk can take a
> > > " considerable amount of time.
> > >
> > > And kiss the disk goodbye for that reason alone.
>
> Clueless and bad advice.

What advice. It was short for
"And you can probably kiss the disk goodbye because of the considerable retry
operations responsible for that 'considerable amount of time' killing the drive off".

>
> > Well, cloning is often the last thing to try if a disk can not be written
> > to, if file recovery tools stall, and if expensive commercial data recovery
> > isn't an option.
>
> Cloning is the first thing to try if a disk starts showing bad sectors, the OS
> fails to load, especially if followed by an error message about disk read/write
> problems, or if reading the drive fails and the PC hangs on disk retries.

Ahh, and it will magically stop doing that, trembling in it's boots, if you fire-up
the cloning program to copy the data off.

>
> [...]
> > You make it sound as if cloning a disk will by definition kill the original disk,
> > let me tell you from real-life experience that, that ain't so.
>
> Ignore the fool, his head is too full of theories and his own s**t.

> If cloning wouldn't work, then file recovery is already hopeless.

Nonsense. If cloning isn't going to work, to do the repairs offline,
then the repairs need to be done online in the fastest possible way
after which the user data may be copied.
That needs specialized programs that can read the drive's raw data.
Unfortunately not all drives may support that.

>
> Regards, Zvi
Anonymous
a b G Storage
July 6, 2005 4:51:03 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

"Joep" <available@request.nl> wrote in message news:e89f2$42c8ffa8$3eddca68$9824@nf1.news-service.com
> "Folkert Rienstra" <see_reply-to@myweb.nl> wrote in message news:42c08a99$0$65640$892e7fe2@authen.white.readfreenews.net...
> > "HaHaHooHooHeeHee" <HaHaHooHooHeeHee@somewhere.com> wrote in message news:vb39682749ACF45EHaHaHooHooHeeHeesome@213.155.197.138
> > > Thanks to Folkert, J. Clark and Rod Speed for their informative replies.
> > > Especially learned from Folkert and Clark's explanations. Good think I
> > > have a lot of time to investigate all of this.
> > >
> > > I will have to look up the ECC business, I think it has something to do
> > > with the mfg. id?
> >
> > Nope.
> >
> > It's an Error Correction Code check that is performed on and recorded
> > with the sector data.
> > On a read an ECC is calculated for the data and compared with the ECC
> > that is recorded with the data. If they don't match or if the ECC can't
> > correct the data such that it returns the same ECC, then the sector is
> > considered bad.
> >
> > >
> > > Does anyone know if there are any other programs besides clonedisk and
> > > drivepatch that attempt to recover bad sectors in DOS?
> >
> > They do? Drives already do it themselves. What programs can do is
> > repeat a read themselves if it doesn't succeed a first time.
>
> Note that read failures aren't caused by 'bad sectors' by definition.

Pretty much so.

> We often see disks that aren't easily read for other reasons

The reason probably being that the OS gives up because it is not it's
task to read information at all cost.

> in which case re-reads are often successful.

Because the recovery apps are more rigorous in trying to get the data,
because that's what they do.

>
> >
> > > I've read reviews on diskpatch and they are mixed.
> >
> > Doesn't surprise me one bit. The author has a habit of blowing up if you
> > make suggestions, taking it as criticism. That obviously limits that programs
> > ability to get better.
> >
>
> Mixed reviews can be better explained than by what you suggest here.

> Obviously DiskPatch will not always be able to clone a disk,

Obviously? By design 'obviously' or by observation in the field 'obviously'?

> often it can though.

'Often' shouldn't be good enough.

> So this easily explains mixed reviews, some were able to clone the disk, some
were not.

> Note that it is very unlikely that if DiskPatch can not clone a disk, other
> programs can.

How so? Does DiskPatch copy without the drive checking the ECCs?
If not then it is very likely that there can be programs that clone a disk
'successfully' in the same time as if it were spotless.

>
> It is true that specifically your (F. Rienstra) critisisms and/or
> suggestions are not welcome because of your 'style' or better said, lack of it.

I once praised you for researching the Read long feature and you
completely flew off the handle, resorting to name calling and all that.
You are a hothead that is suffering from low self esteem.

> But it is a mistake to assume that suggestions made by others aren't
> carefully considered.

What others.

> I also like to add that cisticism or suggestions
> aren't valid or good suggestions by definition.

It's often the opposite that you appear to think of in the first place.
And after you realize that you completely mistook what was said it
is often too late for you to apologize and you let it linger on.

>
> >
> > Does it do reads without ECC checks (Read Long)?
> > I.E. no retries at all, not even by the drive itself?
> >
> > Oh well, here is an excerpt from the online manual:
> >
> > " In case of bad sectors, often repairs can not be made on the original (bad) disk.
> > " If bad sectors exist in areas on the disk that contain disk structures, repairing
> > " these structures is going to be impossible
> >
> > " because writing to bad sectors is impossible.
> >
> > That is wrong.
>
> There are conditions that will prevent a sector from being written to.

Not on current harddrives, not on still functioning ones.
And that is a far cry from "because writing to bad sectors is *impossible*".

>
> >
> > " Cloning the bad disk to a good disk will give you a much better chance of repairing
> > " those damaged structures.
> >
> > Maybe so but not for that reason.
>
> Yes, for that reason. If a sector can not be written to

Not on recent harddrives. Sector reallocation works on writes as well as on reads.

> it is obviously impossible to write correct data to the sector.

So no. The sector gets replaced.

>
> >
> > " Be prepared for the fact that cloning a bad disk to a good disk can take a
> > " considerable amount of time.
> >
> > And kiss the disk goodbye for that reason alone.
>
> Well, cloning is often the last thing to try if a disk can not be written to,

That is a severe limitation. Like a drive with defective write amps or heads.

> if file recovery tools stall,

Ok, if *nothing else* will do. Usually there is something else that will.
It usually is also possible to remove the cause of the stall, once you make
the decision to write off data that isn't likely to be recovered anymore,
not even by cloning. In such case the stall is removed by overwriting the
sector(s) that cause the stall.

> and if expensive commercial data recovery isn't an option.

> To get the data you have to at least try to read the disk.

If it is dying you want to get to the *data* quick, without delays.
You want to have it do it in as little time possible, meaning:
no copying of sectors that have no data in them
not trying to get the drive get to the data at all cost.


> Reading all sectors does take time, it is as simple as that.

No, it is not as simple as that. There are ways of reading the data
without the drive doing retries and check the data on the host instead.

> How would you try to recover the data while not reading the disk at all?

That is a silly question, and you know it. This has been discussed before.

>
> Anyway, many people have been using and have been able to recover intact
> data once they cloned the disk with DiskPatch with file recovery software,
> where the file recovery software would 'stall' on the original disk due to
> read problems.

Very likely as there are many ways leading to Rome.

> You make it sound as if cloning a disk will by definition kill the original disk,

Because this procedure is often recommended as an emergency procedure for
disks that are dying. Disk that are dying need to be cloned in the fastest and
most smartest way. Most cloning programs however are a far cry from that.

> let me tell you from real-life experience that, that ain't so.
July 6, 2005 9:25:24 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

"Folkert Rienstra" <see_reply-to@myweb.nl> wrote in message
news:42cbd966$0$251
> > > > Does anyone know if there are any other programs besides clonedisk
and
> > > > drivepatch that attempt to recover bad sectors in DOS?
> > >
> > > They do? Drives already do it themselves. What programs can do is
> > > repeat a read themselves if it doesn't succeed a first time.
> >
> > Note that read failures aren't caused by 'bad sectors' by definition.
>
> Pretty much so.

No.

>
> > We often see disks that aren't easily read for other reasons
>
> The reason probably being that the OS gives up because it is not it's
> task to read information at all cost.

No. I mean, we determined the other reasons, not the OS.

>
> > in which case re-reads are often successful.
>
> Because the recovery apps are more rigorous in trying to get the data,
> because that's what they do.

Yes.

>
> >
> > >
> > > > I've read reviews on diskpatch and they are mixed.
> > >
> > > Doesn't surprise me one bit. The author has a habit of blowing up if
you
> > > make suggestions, taking it as criticism. That obviously limits that
programs
> > > ability to get better.
> > >
> >
> > Mixed reviews can be better explained than by what you suggest here.
>
> > Obviously DiskPatch will not always be able to clone a disk,
>
> Obviously? By design 'obviously' or by observation in the field
'obviously'?

As in 'obviously a doctor can not cure every patient'. Not because he
incompetent, but simply because some things can't be done.

>
> > often it can though.
>
> 'Often' shouldn't be good enough.

Often is as good as it will ever get.

>
> > So this easily explains mixed reviews, some were able to clone the disk,
some
> were not.
>
> > Note that it is very unlikely that if DiskPatch can not clone a disk,
other
> > programs can.
>
> How so? Does DiskPatch copy without the drive checking the ECCs?
> If not then it is very likely that there can be programs that clone a disk
> 'successfully' in the same time as if it were spotless.

Field experience.

>
> >
> > It is true that specifically your (F. Rienstra) critisisms and/or
> > suggestions are not welcome because of your 'style' or better said, lack
of it.
>
> I once praised you for researching the Read long feature and you
> completely flew off the handle, resorting to name calling and all that.
> You are a hothead that is suffering from low self esteem.

Nice try. Your problem is that your comments and suggestions are often
'misunderstood', not just by me. You make it sound as if you are a very
experienced hard disk, partition table and what not guru while it appears
most of your answers are quotes from reading various specs. In real life
it's not the specs that make the difference but experience. And whit
experience I do not mean a few isolated cases you may have handled at home,
but thousands of them.

>
> > But it is a mistake to assume that suggestions made by others aren't
> > carefully considered.
>
> What others.

Others than F. Rienstra. We communicate with a lot of people, not just you.
In fact too many to all mention them here. So, your question 'what others'
will not be answered more specifically.

>
> > I also like to add that cisticism or suggestions
> > aren't valid or good suggestions by definition.
>
> It's often the opposite that you appear to think of in the first place.

Often suggestions are not good suggestions indeed. Good suggestions are
rare.

> And after you realize that you completely mistook what was said it
> is often too late for you to apologize and you let it linger on.

Incorrect. I do not have a problem with appologies at all.

>
> >
> > >
> > > Does it do reads without ECC checks (Read Long)?
> > > I.E. no retries at all, not even by the drive itself?
> > >
> > > Oh well, here is an excerpt from the online manual:
> > >
> > > " In case of bad sectors, often repairs can not be made on the
original (bad) disk.
> > > " If bad sectors exist in areas on the disk that contain disk
structures, repairing
> > > " these structures is going to be impossible
> > >
> > > " because writing to bad sectors is impossible.
> > >
> > > That is wrong.
> >
> > There are conditions that will prevent a sector from being written to.
>
> Not on current harddrives, not on still functioning ones.
> And that is a far cry from "because writing to bad sectors is
*impossible*".

Disk's do not have unlimited reallocation capacity. When there are no
sectors to spare, you can't write to the disk. Before you come up with smart
ass remarks, yes, field experience, we saw that happen.

>
> >
> > >
> > > " Cloning the bad disk to a good disk will give you a much better
chance of repairing
> > > " those damaged structures.
> > >
> > > Maybe so but not for that reason.
> >
> > Yes, for that reason. If a sector can not be written to
>
> Not on recent harddrives. Sector reallocation works on writes as well as
on reads.

Yes I know, as long as there are sectors to spare.

>
> > it is obviously impossible to write correct data to the sector.
>
> So no. The sector gets replaced.

If spares are available.

>
> >
> > >
> > > " Be prepared for the fact that cloning a bad disk to a good disk can
take a
> > > " considerable amount of time.
> > >
> > > And kiss the disk goodbye for that reason alone.
> >
> > Well, cloning is often the last thing to try if a disk can not be
written to,
>
> That is a severe limitation. Like a drive with defective write amps or
heads.

You're missing the most obvious reason again.

>
> > if file recovery tools stall,
>
> Ok, if *nothing else* will do. Usually there is something else that will.

Often file recovery tools stall when there's disk read issues. Field
experience.

> It usually is also possible to remove the cause of the stall,

Well, it isn't.

> once you make
> the decision to write off data that isn't likely to be recovered anymore,
> not even by cloning. In such case the stall is removed by overwriting the
> sector(s) that cause the stall.

If there are sectors to spare. If you think you've seen it all, you're
wrong. But you are correct, in case of just a few uncorrectable ECC errors,
we often overwite them, you can run a read/write surface scan with DP or
other tools to accopmplish this. An uncorrectable ECC error does not mean
the sector is bad, it can be simply a matter of data corruption.

>
> > and if expensive commercial data recovery isn't an option.
>
> > To get the data you have to at least try to read the disk.
>
> If it is dying you want to get to the *data* quick, without delays.
> You want to have it do it in as little time possible, meaning:

Clone the disk.

> no copying of sectors that have no data in them
> not trying to get the drive get to the data at all cost.

Yes, the point was that almost all commercially available file recovery
tools do not handle read errors very well, and that this prevents what you
just suggested. BTW, the with DiskPatch you can easily limit areas you want
to transfer to a different disk.

>
>
> > Reading all sectors does take time, it is as simple as that.
>
> No, it is not as simple as that. There are ways of reading the data
> without the drive doing retries and check the data on the host instead.

It still takes time reading the entire disk when cloning. Most time is often
not due to the unreadable sectors but simply because the contents of a lot
of sectors have to be transfered. This takes time (what's so difficult to
understand about this).

>
> > How would you try to recover the data while not reading the disk at all?
>
> That is a silly question, and you know it.

No, it's not a silly question, it seemed what you suggested.

> This has been discussed before.

What exactly?

>
> >
> > Anyway, many people have been using and have been able to recover intact
> > data once they cloned the disk with DiskPatch with file recovery
software,
> > where the file recovery software would 'stall' on the original disk due
to
> > read problems.
>
> Very likely as there are many ways leading to Rome.

Point is that for those people there aren't that many roads left.

>
> > You make it sound as if cloning a disk will by definition kill the
original disk,
>
> Because this procedure is often recommended as an emergency procedure for
> disks that are dying. Disk that are dying need to be cloned in the fastest
and
> most smartest way. Most cloning programs however are a far cry from that.
>

DiskPatch has been used very often to do just that and we've never lost a
disk during the clone.

--
Joep

D I Y D a t a R e c o v e r y . N L - Data & Disaster Recovery Tools

http://www.diydatarecovery.nl
http://www.diydatarecovery.com
July 6, 2005 9:33:08 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

"Folkert Rienstra" <see_reply-to@myweb.nl> wrote in message
news:42cbd965$0$251> >
> > Clueless and bad advice.
>
> What advice. It was short for
> "And you can probably kiss the disk goodbye because of the considerable
retry
> operations responsible for that 'considerable amount of time' killing the
drive off".
>

From experience I can tell cloning hardly ever kills the disk. Our customers
have cloned probably thousands of disks with DiskPatch and we've never heard
of a disk dying during the clone operation.

> >
> > > Well, cloning is often the last thing to try if a disk can not be
written
> > > to, if file recovery tools stall, and if expensive commercial data
recovery
> > > isn't an option.
> >
> > Cloning is the first thing to try if a disk starts showing bad sectors,
the OS
> > fails to load, especially if followed by an error message about disk
read/write
> > problems, or if reading the drive fails and the PC hangs on disk
retries.
>
> Ahh, and it will magically stop doing that, trembling in it's boots, if
you fire-up
> the cloning program to copy the data off.

No of course not fool. However you will get all readable data at least.

>
> >
> > [...]
> > > You make it sound as if cloning a disk will by definition kill the
original disk,
> > > let me tell you from real-life experience that, that ain't so.
> >
> > Ignore the fool, his head is too full of theories and his own s**t.
>
> > If cloning wouldn't work, then file recovery is already hopeless.
>
> Nonsense. If cloning isn't going to work, to do the repairs offline,
> then the repairs need to be done online in the fastest possible way
> after which the user data may be copied.

Again, from experience; if cloning doesn't work neither will commercially
available file recovery software, and I guess this is what Zvi is referring
to. On the other hand, if commercially available data recovery fails/stalls
due to read problems, often intact data can be recovered with that same
software after you have cloned the disk, from the clone. You're missing that
point over and over again. I wonder if that could be considered a talent ...

--
Joep
Anonymous
a b G Storage
July 6, 2005 9:33:09 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

on 06 Jul 2005, "Joep" <available@request.nl> wrote in



<edited at server demand>

Joep, I have a disk from which I have somewhat current cd-rw backups
of the data (not a clone). DR programs hang on unreadable/bad sector
errors. I have gotten most of the most current data off of it, sans
the several files which gives disk access errors. Scandisk loops and
WD DLG reports Smart errors (replace drive?). No noise.

What point if any, in this situation would cloning do, since DP
cannot recover data from bad sectors and skips them? Why not go to
something like Spinrite or Hdd Regenerator, since I already have most
of the data? The only thing I can think of that would be accomplished
by a clone would be to get the boot capability of the disk back on
another clean disk (maybe; maybe it already will boot, haven't
tried).

Also, does it make a difference if the clean target disk in the clone
is formatted (fat32 for both target and source) or not. Is there any
real advantage to writing zeros to the target disk prior to cloning,
if the target is already empty and formatted?

news:D be07$42cbfb02$3eddca68$7914@nf1.news-service.com:

> "Folkert Rienstra" <see_reply-to@myweb.nl> wrote in message
> news:42cbd965$0$251> >
>> > Clueless and bad advice.
>>
>> What advice. It was short for
>> "And you can probably kiss the disk goodbye because of the
>> considerable
> retry
>> operations responsible for that 'considerable amount of time'
>> killing the
> drive off".
>>
>
> From experience I can tell cloning hardly ever kills the disk.
> Our customers have cloned probably thousands of disks with
> DiskPatch and we've never heard of a disk dying during the clone
> operation.
>
>> >

>> >
>> > Cloning is the first thing to try if a disk starts showing
>> > bad sectors,
> the OS
>> > fails to load, especially if followed by an error message
>> > about disk
> read/write
>> > problems, or if reading the drive fails and the PC hangs on
>> > disk
> retries.
>>
>> Ahh, and it will magically stop doing that, trembling in it's
>> boots, if
> you fire-up
>> the cloning program to copy the data off.
>
> No of course not fool. However you will get all readable data at
> least.
>
>>
>> >
>> > [...]
>> > > You make it sound as if cloning a disk will by definition
>> > > kill the
> original disk,
>> > > let me tell you from real-life experience that, that ain't
>> > > so.
>> >
>> > Ignore the fool, his head is too full of theories and his own
>> > s**t.
>>
>> > If cloning wouldn't work, then file recovery is already
>> > hopeless.
>>
>> Nonsense. If cloning isn't going to work, to do the repairs
>> offline, then the repairs need to be done online in the fastest
>> possible way after which the user data may be copied.
>
> Again, from experience; if cloning doesn't work neither will
> commercially available file recovery software, and I guess this
> is what Zvi is referring to. On the other hand, if commercially
> available data recovery fails/stalls due to read problems, often
> intact data can be recovered with that same software after you
> have cloned the disk, from the clone. You're missing that point
> over and over again. I wonder if that could be considered a
> talent ...
>
> --
> Joep
>
>
>
!