HD no longer recognizable by XP pro once used in XP Home
Elora...@yahooo.com
I have a WD 1200 HD in an external USB case.I was using it with XP
PRO.
I needed to transfer some files to a PC that's running XP Home. Every
thing was working fine until I returned drive to the XP Pro PC. Now XP
PRO displays "The disk in Dive H is not formattted. Do you want to
format now?"
I checked the drive under Administrative Tools -> Computer Management
-> Disk Management:
It shows the drive as blank under"File System",
were the other drives as "NTFS."
Is there anything I can do to have the drive back? I wish I don't have
to format and lose all data on it :(
Thank you for you time.
cate...@my-deja.com
Elora...@yahooo.com wrote:
>blank under"File System",
> were the other drives as "NTFS."
>
> Is there anything I can do to have the drive back? I wish I don't have
> to format and lose all data on it :(
>
> Thank you for you time.
You can try something like this:
http://www.cgsecurity.org/wiki/TestDisk
to see if the partition information can be recovered. you may need to
format it before using a utility like this- this doesn't neccessarily
destroy your data, although it certainly doesn't help.
the cause of something like this is most likely pure bad luck- the
drive had its brains scrambled somewhere between PC A and PC B.
carl
John Doe
>
> Is there anything I can do to have the drive back? I wish I don't
> have to format and lose all data on it :(
The first thing you do is make a clone of the hard drive. If you
ever get back into Windows, you make copies of any important files
on your computer.
Good luck.
Rod Speed
> Hello, can someone please help me,
>
> I have a WD 1200 HD in an external USB case.I was using it with XP
> PRO.
> I needed to transfer some files to a PC that's running XP Home. Every
> thing was working fine until I returned drive to the XP Pro PC. Now XP
> PRO displays "The disk in Dive H is not formattted. Do you want to
> format now?"
> I checked the drive under Administrative Tools -> Computer Management
> -> Disk Management:
> It shows the drive as blank under"File System",
> were the other drives as "NTFS."
> Is there anything I can do to have the drive back?
A decent recovery app should get the drive back.
I like Easy Recovery Pro, but it isnt free.
OhNo
<Elora...@yahooo.com> wrote in message
news:mc3ea2la725e1t22k...@4ax.com...
the wonders of XP..........before you do anything try using ExplorerXP to
look at the drive
its a very small prog and is more sensitive to mass storage devices.
once installed, looking in the left pane, right click My Computer then click
Manage.
Under Storage select Disc Management.............does the drive appear in
the right pane, but with no letter.
If yes, right click and give it a new letter.
You may now have to close ExXP and reopen for it to be fully recognised.
If this all works you now have the chance to save all the data to another
drive.
dj
Elora...@yahooo.com
wrote:
>the wonders of XP..........before you do anything try using ExplorerXP to
>look at the drive
>
>http://www.explorerxp.com/
>
>its a very small prog and is more sensitive to mass storage devices.
>
>once installed, looking in the left pane, right click My Computer then click
>Manage.
>
>Under Storage select Disc Management.............does the drive appear in
>the right pane, but with no letter.
>
>If yes, right click and give it a new letter.
The drive does appear in the right pane. It does have have a letter,
but it does not show what type it's file system is (blank)
Elora...@yahooo.com
>A decent recovery app should get the drive back.
>
>I like Easy Recovery Pro, but it isnt free.
Thank you for answering. I'll try to buy the program if nothing else
worked.
Elora...@yahooo.com
wrote:
Thank you. Can I still make clone even though windows can't access it?
JAD
<Elora...@yahooo.com> wrote in message
news:mc3ea2la725e1t22k...@4ax.com...
> Hello, can someone please help me,
>
> I have a WD 1200 HD in an external USB case.I was using it with XP
> PRO.
> I needed to transfer some files to a PC that's running XP Home. Every
> thing was working fine until I returned drive to the XP Pro PC. Now XP
> PRO displays "The disk in Dive H is not formatted. Do you want to
JAD
http://forums.devshed.com/windows-help-34/import-secondary-hdd-in-xp-pro-57496.html
<Elora...@yahooo.com> wrote in message
news:mc3ea2la725e1t22k...@4ax.com...
cate...@my-deja.com
not with windows. you can make an image of the drive with Ghost or
similar, but the image will be as useless as the drive is currently.
your drive no longer remembers what kind of partitions are on it.
cloning it would simply clone the "empty" disk. you need to restore
that memory in order to access the information in there.
the drive may have suffered physical damage; it may have had its MBR
scrambled, or etc. you may find that you cannot restore the partitions
at all, in which case you need to move to more extensive data recovery
software, like Spinrite or Stellar Phoenix or some such. these check a
disk bit by bit (literally:)) and recover available data.
that can be a time consuming process for modern hard drives- sometime
several days continous operation.
carl
Rod Speed
Yes, with something like True Image that
will clone when you boot the rescue CD.
John Doe
> Elora_Grace yahooo.com wrote:
>> On Sun, 02 Jul 2006 01:20:33 GMT, John Doe <jdoe
>> usenetlove.invalid> wrote:
>>
>> > in yahooo.com wrote:
>> >
>> >>
>> >> Is there anything I can do to have the drive back? I wish I
>> >> don't have to format and lose all data on it :(
>> >
>> >The first thing you do is make a clone of the hard drive. If you
>> >ever get back into Windows, you make copies of any important
>> >files on your computer.
>> >
>> >Good luck.
>> Thank you. Can I still make clone even though windows can't
>> access it?
>
> not with windows. you can make an image of the drive with Ghost or
> similar,
That's correct.
>
> but the image will be as useless as the drive is currently.
That is very wrong.
Copy and paste is a fundamental part of computing. This is an
example where it can be very useful. When in trouble and before
trying to correct the situation, you make a copy so you can easily
restore and start over if things go wrong.
>
> your drive no longer remembers what kind of partitions are on it.
> cloning it would simply clone the "empty" disk. you need to
> restore that memory in order to access the information in there.
That is horribly wrong. Since you screwed up in the first place, now
is the time to make sure you don't screw up any further.
This cannot be emphasized enough.
WHEN YOU RUN INTO PROBLEMS, THE FIRST THING YOU DO IS COPY OR BACKUP
WHAT YOU HAVE, ANYWAY YOU CAN, WITHOUT OTHERWISE MANIPULATING THE
DATA. THAT GOES DOUBLE FOR PEOPLE WHO DON'T HAVE A COPY TO BEGIN
WITH.
Before you start messing with your storage media, make sure you have
copies.
>
> the drive may have suffered physical damage; it may have had its
> MBR scrambled, or etc. you may find that you cannot restore the
> partitions at all, in which case
In which case you are basing your advice on a diagnosis you haven't
made.
>
> you need to move to more extensive data recovery
> software, like Spinrite or Stellar Phoenix or some such. these
> check a disk bit by bit (literally:)) and recover available data.
The first thing you do before checking or trying to recover anything
is to clone the drive in order to back up any important files,
especially if you don't have any recent backup to begin with.
If Elora_Grace didn't have any important files, maybe that wouldn't
matter, but she does.
>
>
> carl
>
>
>
> Path: newssvr13.news.prodigy.com!newsdbm04.news.prodigy.com!newsdst01.news.prodigy.net!prodigy.com!newscon06.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.net!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!postnews.google.com!p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
> From: caterbro my-deja.com
> Newsgroups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt
> Subject: Re: HD no longer recognizable by XP pro once used in XP Home
> Date: 2 Jul 2006 09:24:07 -0700
> Organization: http://groups.google.com
> Lines: 37
> Message-ID: <1151857447.633066.251860 p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com>
> References: <mc3ea2la725e1t22k8ohepig3vh11sms5j 4ax.com> <Xns97F3CEF79560C0123456789 207.115.17.102> <p8nfa21rsdaq5ldcpaudn26tbj184rppur 4ax.com>
> NNTP-Posting-Host: 209.6.150.237
> Mime-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
> X-Trace: posting.google.com 1151857451 17996 127.0.0.1 (2 Jul 2006 16:24:11 GMT)
> X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse google.com
> NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 2 Jul 2006 16:24:11 +0000 (UTC)
> In-Reply-To: <p8nfa21rsdaq5ldcpaudn26tbj184rppur 4ax.com>
> User-Agent: G2/0.2
> X-HTTP-UserAgent: Opera/9.00 (Windows NT 5.1; U; en),gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe)
> Complaints-To: groups-abuse google.com
> Injection-Info: p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com; posting-host=209.6.150.237; posting-account=3FtGOgwAAAClxxoT73vOV_a65f7vOm7y
> Xref: prodigy.net alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt:470108
>
>
Elora...@yahooo.com
IT WORKED. I have my drive and all data on it back thanks to you and
this nice utility.
According to the utility the BOOT SECTOR of the drive was corrupt. It
has an option to re wite it. and the drive is back.
Thanks again to you and all the others who responded. :))
John Doe
> On 1 Jul 2006 18:00:48 -0700, caterbro my-deja.com wrote:
>
>>
>>Elora_Grace yahooo.com wrote:
>>>
>>> Is there anything I can do to have the drive back? I wish I
>>> don't have to format and lose all data on it :(
>>
>>You can try something like this:
>>
>>http://www.cgsecurity.org/wiki/TestDisk
>>
>>
>>to see if the partition information can be recovered. you may
>>need to format it before using a utility like this- this doesn't
>>neccessarily destroy your data, although it certainly doesn't
>>help.
>>
>>the cause of something like this is most likely pure bad luck- the
>>drive had its brains scrambled somewhere between PC A and PC B.
>>
>>carl
>
> IT WORKED. I have my drive and all data on it back thanks to you
> and this nice utility.
> According to the utility the BOOT SECTOR of the drive was corrupt.
> It has an option to re wite it. and the drive is back.
>
> Thanks again to you and all the others who responded. :))
Some people aren't so lucky, you might not be so lucky next time.
But now since you know how valuable some of the files on your
computer are, of course you already bought a USB flash drive or two
and made copies so you won't risk losing your files next time
something goes wrong. Hopefully the memory will remain useful.
>
>
>
>
> Path: newssvr13.news.prodigy.com!newsdbm04.news.prodigy.com!newsdst01.news.prodigy.net!prodigy.com!newscon04.news.prodigy.net!prodigy.net!newshub.sdsu.edu!elnk-nf2-pas!newsfeed.earthlink.net!stamper.news.pas.earthlink.net!newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net.POSTED!f9b4e7d1!not-for-mail
> From: Elora_Grace yahooo.com
> Newsgroups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt
> Subject: Re: HD no longer recognizable by XP pro once used in XP Home <SOLVED>
> Message-ID: <n76ga251tg628ucuo4r2qcqe4ncarpbjvn 4ax.com>
> References: <mc3ea2la725e1t22k8ohepig3vh11sms5j 4ax.com> <1151802048.283363.327480 75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>
> X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 3.3/32.846
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> Lines: 32
> Date: Sun, 02 Jul 2006 19:19:57 GMT
> NNTP-Posting-Host: 71.48.203.152
> X-Complaints-To: abuse earthlink.net
> X-Trace: newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net 1151867997 71.48.203.152 (Sun, 02 Jul 2006 12:19:57 PDT)
> NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 02 Jul 2006 12:19:57 PDT
> Organization: EarthLink Inc. -- http://www.EarthLink.net
> Xref: prodigy.net alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt:470114
>
cate...@my-deja.com
John Doe wrote:
> > but the image will be as useless as the drive is currently.
>
> That is very wrong.
if you image a drive with corrupted or invalid partition information,
the image will have the same problems. no matter if working with the
copy or the original disk, further work has to be done to possibly
restore that data. the is no getting around that.
> WHEN YOU RUN INTO PROBLEMS, THE FIRST THING YOU DO IS COPY OR BACKUP
> WHAT YOU HAVE, ANYWAY YOU CAN, WITHOUT OTHERWISE MANIPULATING THE
> DATA. THAT GOES DOUBLE FOR PEOPLE WHO DON'T HAVE A COPY TO BEGIN
> WITH.
take a pill, friend. you are striving to a make a point that not in
contention here and obscuring the straightforward nature of this
question.
first, depending on exactly what kind of higgedly-piggedly has gone on
in the drive, it may not be "image-able" at all. so theres a
possibility of a lot of wasted effort before doing the most generic
kind of troubleshooting imagineable.
second, it would take all of 10 minutes to download, install and
test-fly some partition recovery software, which will not make the
drive in any worse shape than it is now, and may resolve the problem
post-haste, and is free.
third, imaging a drive like this, depending on your needs, requires a
significant effort and set of resources that far exceed the necessary
for basic diagnosis and troubleshooting. that may not be available; it
may be troublesome and costly and it is defintely time-consuming. so i
vote for baby steps.
> In which case you are basing your advice on a diagnosis you haven't
> made.
astonishing that that would happen on USENET! my heart may never beat
again!
we are also assuming the OP has exhuasted all the logical steps to
narrow the cause of the problem to the hard drive in specfic- i don't
see you spazzing out about that possibility.
>
> >
> > you need to move to more extensive data recovery
> > software, like Spinrite or Stellar Phoenix or some such. these
> > check a disk bit by bit (literally:)) and recover available data.
>
> The first thing you do before checking or trying to recover anything
> is to clone the drive in order to back up any important files,
> especially if you don't have any recent backup to begin with.
great, provided you have 2-5 spare hours lying around, an empty HDD
larger than the one you want to clone, bootable media of your image
technology of choice, which can range in price from $30-$300, and a PC
that will boot it and support your choice of HDD connectors
fantastic. lets do that instead of the 10-minute diagnosis/recovery
that's free and unlikely to cause any additional harm.
carl
cate...@my-deja.com
JAD wrote:
> look here at the last post
> http://forums.devshed.com/windows-help-34/import-secondary-hdd-in-xp-pro-57496.html
>
I like this answer, mainly because it hadn't occured to me that
someonbe would use dynamic disks without a compelling reason. good
post.
carl
cate...@my-deja.com
hooray!!! :) now, make some backup CDs right away! ;)
carl
Rod Speed
> John Doe wrote:
>> cate...@my-deja.com wrote
>>> but the image will be as useless as the drive is currently.
>> That is very wrong.
> if you image a drive with corrupted or invalid partition
> information, the image will have the same problems.
Yes, but imaging the drive before you try any recovery software
does allow you to recover back to the original bad state if the
recovery software cant manage to recover whatever is bad.
That allows you to try different recovery software.
> no matter if working with the copy or the original disk, further work has
> to be done to possibly restore that data. the is no getting around that.
Yes, but imaging the bad drive does allow you to try more than one
piece of recovery software. They arent all identical capabiity wise.
>> WHEN YOU RUN INTO PROBLEMS, THE FIRST THING YOU DO
>> IS COPY OR BACKUP WHAT YOU HAVE, ANYWAY YOU CAN,
>> WITHOUT OTHERWISE MANIPULATING THE DATA. THAT GOES
>> DOUBLE FOR PEOPLE WHO DON'T HAVE A COPY TO BEGIN WITH.
> take a pill, friend. you are striving to a make a point that not in contention here
Wrong, he's commenting on your original that there is no point
in imaging the bad drive and your original is just plain wrong.
> and obscuring the straightforward nature of this question.
You cant manage to grasp the basics on imaging the
bad drive before attempting to repair the problem it has.
> first, depending on exactly what kind of higgedly-piggedly
> has gone on in the drive, it may not be "image-able" at all.
Wrong. And decent imager can image at the sector level.
> so theres a possibility of a lot of wasted effort
Nope, just enough of a clue to image at the sector level.
> before doing the most generic kind of troubleshooting imagineable.
Which can screw the drive data structures even worse than they
are already. If you have an image, you can try various fixes.
> second, it would take all of 10 minutes to download, install
> and test-fly some partition recovery software, which will not
> make the drive in any worse shape than it is now, and may
> resolve the problem post-haste, and is free.
And it makes more sense to image the drive before using something
that you have just downloaded and havent tried before.
> third, imaging a drive like this, depending on your needs,
> requires a significant effort and set of resources that far
> exceed the necessary for basic diagnosis and troubleshooting.
ALL it needs is another drive.
> that may not be available; it may be troublesome
> and costly and it is defintely time-consuming.
The time to image the drive is trivial and you can
do something else while its happening anyway.
> so i vote for baby steps.
More fool you.
>> In which case you are basing your advice
>> on a diagnosis you haven't made.
> astonishing that that would happen on USENET!
> my heart may never beat again!
> we are also assuming the OP has exhuasted all the logical steps
> to narrow the cause of the problem to the hard drive in specfic-
Stupid assumption. Makes more sense to do it the safe way instead.
> i don't see you spazzing out about that possibility.
>>> you need to move to more extensive data recovery
>>> software, like Spinrite or Stellar Phoenix or some such. these
>>> check a disk bit by bit (literally:)) and recover available data.
>> The first thing you do before checking or trying to recover anything
>> is to clone the drive in order to back up any important files,
>> especially if you don't have any recent backup to begin with.
> great, provided you have 2-5 spare hours lying around, an empty HDD
> larger than the one you want to clone, bootable media of your image
> technology of choice, which can range in price from $30-$300, and
> a PC that will boot it and support your choice of HDD connectors
> fantastic. lets do that instead of the 10-minute diagnosis/recovery
> that's free and unlikely to cause any additional harm.
That last is just plain wrong when you use something like Spinrite.
cate...@my-deja.com
> > take a pill, friend. you are striving to a make a point that not in contention here
>
> Wrong, he's commenting on your original that there is no point
> in imaging the bad drive and your original is just plain wrong.
try reading it again- i made no such "original"
there is nothing wrong with imaging the drive; there are few simpler,
quicker and cheaper steps to take before that. that's all.
> > first, depending on exactly what kind of higgedly-piggedly
> > has gone on in the drive, it may not be "image-able" at all.
>
> Wrong. And decent imager can image at the sector level.
uh... 132MB limit mean anything to you? or "dynamic disk"? there's a
few things that can and do prevent imaging a drive- it's not cut and
dried. it's a complex process with a lot of variables, and suggesting
it to someone on USENET with limited amounts of verifiable information
is not terribly responsible.
it's like telling someone with one squeaky brake that they need to
replace all their rotors and pads and change out the brake fluid out
"to be on the safe side"
neither you, nor me, nor "john doe" knows anything more about this
person's problems than what's been posted here- that's why i'm
suggesting the quickest, safest, and easiest way out.
and lo! it worked- everything is fine now, no need to spend the better
part of day yanking PCs apart and fiddling with live CDs, spare hard
drives, and gobs of time.
> > before doing the most generic kind of troubleshooting imagineable.
>
> Which can screw the drive data structures even worse than they
> are already. If you have an image, you can try various fixes.
that's a load of mule muffins. partition information recovery is
harmless to your drive. TestDisk, which i recomended, and may i remind
you, *solved the problem*, is pathetically easy to use and very
reliable.
now, if someone had suggested fdisk, or chkdsk /r, that would be wrong.
restoring an MBR is safe as houses.
> > third, imaging a drive like this, depending on your needs,
> > requires a significant effort and set of resources that far
> > exceed the necessary for basic diagnosis and troubleshooting.
>
> ALL it needs is another drive.
OK- assume it's an 80GB consumer drive- she needs another of the same
maker or a bigger drive- that's $85.
add in True Image, which is an excellent product, and that's $30- now
she's $115 in the hole and needs a PC that can handle all the drives
and do 2 - 6 hours worth of crunch time, AND there's about a 1:4 chance
of getting a corrupt image AND doing sector by sector imaging on
anything above the 132GB limit is guaranteed to have a higher fail rate
AND might screw up a giant drive permanently.
so.... the quick, free, and safe option still seems like the right one
to me. go figure.
> > so i vote for baby steps.
>
> More fool you.
it's working out so far- i'll chalk this up in my "Win" column, and you
and John Doe can chalk it up in your "Sour Grapes" column.
> > we are also assuming the OP has exhuasted all the logical steps
> > to narrow the cause of the problem to the hard drive in specfic-
>
> Stupid assumption. Makes more sense to do it the safe way instead.
MY way was the safe way. YOUR way was the long, expensive, complicated
way.
> > fantastic. lets do that instead of the 10-minute diagnosis/recovery
> > that's free and unlikely to cause any additional harm.
>
> That last is just plain wrong when you use something like Spinrite.
Spinrite is *not* the "10-minute diagnosis/recovery". duh.
carl
Rod Speed
> Rod Speed wrote
>>>>> but the image will be as useless as the drive is currently.
>>>> That is very wrong.
>>> if you image a drive with corrupted or invalid partition
>>> information, the image will have the same problems.
>> Yes, but imaging the drive before you try any recovery software
>> does allow you to recover back to the original bad state if the
>> recovery software cant manage to recover whatever is bad.
>> That allows you to try different recovery software.
>>> no matter if working with the copy or the original disk, further work has
>>> to be done to possibly restore that data. the is no getting around that.
>> Yes, but imaging the bad drive does allow you to try more than one
>> piece of recovery software. They arent all identical capabiity wise.
>>>> WHEN YOU RUN INTO PROBLEMS, THE FIRST THING YOU DO
>>>> IS COPY OR BACKUP WHAT YOU HAVE, ANYWAY YOU CAN,
>>>> WITHOUT OTHERWISE MANIPULATING THE DATA. THAT GOES
>>>> DOUBLE FOR PEOPLE WHO DON'T HAVE A COPY TO BEGIN WITH.
>>> take a pill, friend. you are striving to a
>>> make a point that not in contention here
>> Wrong, he's commenting on your original that there is no point
>> in imaging the bad drive and your original is just plain wrong.
> try reading it again-
No need, it was wrong then and still is now.
> i made no such "original"
Says he after carefully deleting where he said just that from the quoting.
Its now back again right at the top.
> there is nothing wrong with imaging the drive;
The exact opposite of what you said originally.
> there are few simpler, quicker and cheaper
> steps to take before that. that's all.
Nothing like you originally said.
>>> first, depending on exactly what kind of higgedly-piggedly
>>> has gone on in the drive, it may not be "image-able" at all.
>> Wrong. And decent imager can image at the sector level.
> uh... 132MB limit mean anything to you?
Irrelevant to whether sector imaging still works fine.
> or "dynamic disk"?
You didnt say it was useless with dynamic disks and
you would have been just plain wrong even if you did.
> there's a few things that can and do prevent imaging a drive-
Bugger all in fact in practice.
> it's not cut and dried. it's a complex process with a lot of variables,
Bullshit it is with sector level imaging.
> and suggesting it to someone on USENET with limited
> amounts of verifiable information is not terribly responsible.
More mindlessly silly stuff. Wont do any harm over not doing one at all.
> it's like telling someone with one squeaky brake that
> they need to replace all their rotors and pads and
> change out the brake fluid out "to be on the safe side"
Nope, nothing like.
> neither you, nor me, nor "john doe" knows anything more
> about this person's problems than what's been posted here-
Which is another damned good reason for imaging the drive for
safety before doing anything to attempt to make it usable again.
> that's why i'm suggesting the quickest, safest, and easiest way out.
You did the exact opposite in fact.
> and lo! it worked- everything is fine now, no need to
> spend the better part of day yanking PCs apart and
> fiddling with live CDs, spare hard drives, and gobs of time.
And as far as you ever knew, the result could have been completely different.
>>> before doing the most generic kind of troubleshooting imagineable.
>> Which can screw the drive data structures even worse than they
>> are already. If you have an image, you can try various fixes.
> that's a load of mule muffins. partition information recovery is
> harmless to your drive. TestDisk, which i recomended, and may i remind
> you, *solved the problem*, is pathetically easy to use and very reliable.
Irrelevant to your stupid pig ignorant
claim TO JOE, that imaging is useless.
> now, if someone had suggested fdisk, or chkdsk /r, that
> would be wrong. restoring an MBR is safe as houses.
Irrelevant to your stupid pig ignorant
claim TO JOE, that imaging is useless.
>>> third, imaging a drive like this, depending on your needs,
>>> requires a significant effort and set of resources that far
>>> exceed the necessary for basic diagnosis and troubleshooting.
>> ALL it needs is another drive.
> OK- assume it's an 80GB consumer drive- she needs
> another of the same maker or a bigger drive- that's $85.
Not if you have one available to use.
> add in True Image, which is an excellent product, and that's $30-
Not if you choose to not pay for it. There are free imagers too.
> now she's $115 in the hole and needs a PC that can handle
> all the drives and do 2 - 6 hours worth of crunch time, AND
> there's about a 1:4 chance of getting a corrupt image
Pig ignorant silly stuff.
> AND doing sector by sector imaging on anything above the 132GB limit
Pig ignorant silly stuff when its done with a linux based imager.
> is guaranteed to have a higher fail rate AND
> might screw up a giant drive permanently.
More utterly mindless pig ignorant silly stuff.
> so.... the quick, free, and safe option still
> seems like the right one to me. go figure.
Yep, you're a fool that lives dangerously.
Nothing to 'figure' about that.
>>> so i vote for baby steps.
>> More fool you.
> it's working out so far- i'll chalk this up in my "Win" column, and
> you and John Doe can chalk it up in your "Sour Grapes" column.
Never ever could bullshit its way out of a wet paper bag.
>>> we are also assuming the OP has exhuasted all the logical steps
>>> to narrow the cause of the problem to the hard drive in specfic-
>> Stupid assumption. Makes more sense to do it the safe way instead.
> MY way was the safe way.
Bare faced pig ignorant lie.
> YOUR way was the long, expensive, complicated way.
Bare faced pig ignorant lie.
>>> fantastic. lets do that instead of the 10-minute diagnosis/recovery
>>> that's free and unlikely to cause any additional harm.
>> That last is just plain wrong when you use something like Spinrite.
> Spinrite is *not* the "10-minute diagnosis/recovery". duh.
Pity it was what JOE was suggesting might be worth
trying if more basic recovery approaches didnt work.
cate...@my-deja.com
Rod Speed wrote:
> > try reading it again-
>
> No need, it was wrong then and still is now.
>
> > i made no such "original"
>
> Says he after carefully deleting where he said just that from the quoting.
>
> Its now back again right at the top.
oh, for the love of mike. here's a LINK to the orginal post i made,
that now seems to be getting such a LOT of sand in your vagina:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt/msg/043ab348409be31b?dmode=source
you know, a LINK? click on it with your MOUSE, where all the funny
LETTERS and NUMBERS are? with your MOUSE? you know?
now what exactly are you trying to tell me i wrote? exactly, please?
> > uh... 132MB limit mean anything to you?
>
> Irrelevant to whether sector imaging still works fine.
no it's fucking not, duh. the sectors aren't really there, you know?
they're like, virtual n stuff, and if your motherboard doesn't play
nice with it, YOU CAN"T GET A GOOD IMAGE.
> > or "dynamic disk"?
>
> You didnt say it was useless with dynamic disks and
> you would have been just plain wrong even if you did.
>
> > there's a few things that can and do prevent imaging a drive-
>
> Bugger all in fact in practice.
gee, seeing as how i do this at least a few time a week in a
professional capacity, i think i'll rely on my informed opinion and not
yours. imaging a drive is not more reliable than 1:4 and always a pain
in the ass.
> > it's not cut and dried. it's a complex process with a lot of variables,
>
> Bullshit it is with sector level imaging.
dude, do you have a tiny clue? maker, model, of drive, of motherboard,
the software you are using, the way you are connecting the drives to
the board, the fucking way you are booting the goddamned live cd or net
image- did you know about the PATA/SATA dual mode compatibility issues
on many motherboards not more than 2 years old? there's a fucking
million things that could go wrong! what if its a 440BX she's using
with dynamic disks on SCSI and no BIOS level USB support? or anyone one
of a number of silly situations i could rattle off, most of which i've
seen- for christ's sake, I've seen BRAND NEW motherboards simply refuse
to function with certain models and brands of hard drives also BRAND
NEW let alone the MILLIONS of different combinations available in the
last 6 years.
> Irrelevant to your stupid pig ignorant
> claim TO JOE, that imaging is useless.
cite.
> > now, if someone had suggested fdisk, or chkdsk /r, that
> > would be wrong. restoring an MBR is safe as houses.
>
> Irrelevant to your stupid pig ignorant
> claim TO JOE, that imaging is useless.
cite
> >>> so i vote for baby steps.
>
> >> More fool you.
>
> > it's working out so far- i'll chalk this up in my "Win" column, and
> > you and John Doe can chalk it up in your "Sour Grapes" column.
>
> Never ever could bullshit its way out of a wet paper bag.
funny how my suggestion, very much akin to one several others made
before you poked your beak in, FIXED THE PROBLEM.
> >>> fantastic. lets do that instead of the 10-minute diagnosis/recovery
> >>> that's free and unlikely to cause any additional harm.
>
> >> That last is just plain wrong when you use something like Spinrite.
>
> > Spinrite is *not* the "10-minute diagnosis/recovery". duh.
>
> Pity it was what JOE was suggesting might be worth
> trying if more basic recovery approaches didnt work.
no dimwit, Spinrite is what i suggested, as a far-distant hypothetical
if the quick safe, and easy way didn't work. at which point, the OP
could have imaged their goddamned drive and heaved to for the next
fucking week, because that's how long it would take to make an image or
two and run spinrite on anything bigger than 9.1 GB IBM Ultra.
carl
Rod Speed
> Rod Speed wrote
>>> try reading it again-
>> No need, it was wrong then and still is now.
>>> i made no such "original"
>> Says he after carefully deleting where he said just that from the quoting.
>> Its now back again right at the top.
> oh, for the love of mike. here's a LINK to the orginal post i made,
> that now seems to be getting such a LOT of sand in your vagina:
> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt/msg/043ab348409be31b?dmode=source
> you know, a LINK? click on it with your MOUSE, where all the funny
> LETTERS and NUMBERS are? with your MOUSE? you know?
>
> now what exactly are you trying to tell me i wrote? exactly, please?
Never ever could bullshit your way out of a wet paper bag.
YOU made this stupid pig ignorant claim
>>>>> but the image will be as useless as the drive is currently.
>>> uh... 132MB limit mean anything to you?
>> Irrelevant to whether sector imaging still works fine.
> no it's fucking not, duh. the sectors aren't really there, you know?
> they're like, virtual n stuff, and if your motherboard doesn't play
> nice with it, YOU CAN"T GET A GOOD IMAGE.
How odd that I can image my drives that are WAY over 132GB fine.
>>> or "dynamic disk"?
>> You didnt say it was useless with dynamic disks and
>> you would have been just plain wrong even if you did.
>>> there's a few things that can and do prevent imaging a drive-
>> Bugger all in fact in practice.
> gee, seeing as how i do this at least a few time a week
> in a professional capacity, i think i'll rely on my informed
> opinion and not yours. imaging a drive is not more
> reliable than 1:4 and always a pain in the ass.
You can keep repeating that pathetic little pig ignorant mantra
till the cows come home if you like, changes absolutely nothing.
Plenty of us manage to image drives EVERY TIME.
You cant manage something as basic as that ? YOUR problem.
>>> it's not cut and dried. it's a complex process with a lot of variables,
>> Bullshit it is with sector level imaging.
> dude, do you have a tiny clue?
Fraid so, dud.
> maker, model, of drive, of motherboard, the software you are using,
> the way you are connecting the drives to the board, the fucking way
> you are booting the goddamned live cd or net image-
Never ever could bullshit its way out of a wet paper bag.
Any decent imager handles that stuff fine. You're
stuck with a dud ? Makes a good match for you.
> did you know about the PATA/SATA dual mode compatibility
> issues on many motherboards not more than 2 years old?
You cant manage even the simplest stuff ? YOUR problem, as always.
> there's a fucking million things that could go wrong!
Cant even manage to count to 10.
> what if its a 440BX she's using with dynamic
> disks on SCSI and no BIOS level USB support?
Sure, there are a few situations where imaging isnt as easy.
But it make a hell of a lot more sense to image the drive when
its easy, as it is the absolute vast bulk of the time than to be
making a VERY spectacular fool with that stupid pig ignorant
claim you keep carefully deleting from the quoting.
> or anyone one of a number of silly situations i could rattle off,
> most of which i've seen- for christ's sake, I've seen BRAND NEW
> motherboards simply refuse to function with certain models and
> brands of hard drives also BRAND NEW let alone the MILLIONS
> of different combinations available in the last 6 years.
You cant even manage the simplest stuff ? YOUR problem.
>> Irrelevant to your stupid pig ignorant
>> claim TO JOHN, that imaging is useless.
> cite.
That stupid pig ignorant claim that you keep deleting from the
quoting and I keep restoring, you pathetic excuse for a bullshit artist.
>>> now, if someone had suggested fdisk, or chkdsk /r, that
>>> would be wrong. restoring an MBR is safe as houses.
>> Irrelevant to your stupid pig ignorant
>> claim TO JOHN, that imaging is useless.
> cite
That stupid pig ignorant claim that you keep deleting from the
quoting and I keep restoring, you pathetic excuse for a bullshit artist.
>>>>> so i vote for baby steps.
>>>> More fool you.
>>> it's working out so far- i'll chalk this up in my "Win" column, and
>>> you and John Doe can chalk it up in your "Sour Grapes" column.
>> Never ever could bullshit its way out of a wet paper bag.
> funny how my suggestion, very much akin to one several others
> made before you poked your beak in, FIXED THE PROBLEM.
Pure fluke when you had fuck all info to go on.
And only a fool would use something a blow hard
like you suggests without imaging it first ANYWAY.
John Doe
> there is nothing wrong with imaging the drive; there are few
> simpler, quicker and cheaper steps to take before that. that's
> all.
Quicker and cheaper, Yes. To take before that, No.
> [Cloning is] a complex process with a lot of variables, and
> suggesting it to someone on USENET with limited amounts of
> verifiable information is not terribly responsible.
It's not that complex. Whether it's responsible depends on how
important their files are.
> it's like telling someone with one squeaky brake that they need to
> replace all their rotors and pads and change out the brake fluid
> out "to be on the safe side"
No it's not. It's like telling them to duplicate that wheel in a
Star Trek replicator before they attempt to repair the brake. In the
hardware realm you cannot do that, but you can in the software
realm.
And the value of that wheel can be nearly nothing or extremely
high.
> neither you, nor me, nor "john doe" knows anything more about this
> person's problems than what's been posted here- that's why i'm
> suggesting the quickest, safest, and easiest way out.
You are plainly wrong. Apparently you do not understand the basic
concept of software, that you can make a copy before you begin
messing with things.
> and lo! it worked- everything is fine now,
That was a decision the original poster had to make. It would be
fine unless others might someday read your uncorrected advice.
> no need to spend the
> better part of day yanking PCs apart and fiddling with live CDs,
> spare hard drives, and gobs of time.
You are a troll.
> OK- assume it's an 80GB consumer drive- she needs another of the
> same maker or a bigger drive- that's $85.
You mean $50 unless a friend has one. Or you could use DVDs.
In fact, you don't know if the original poster has access to someone
she did not want to ask for help at first. Posting to USENET is easy
and is sometimes a first step.
> so.... the quick, free, and safe option still seems like the right
> one to me. go figure.
Cloning a drive before you mess with it is the safe option.
It's just like copying a file before you edit it. Everybody in the
world knows that one.
> it's working out so far- i'll chalk this up in my "Win" column,
> and you and John Doe can chalk it up in your "Sour Grapes" column.
That was a decision the original poster had to make. It would be
fine unless others might someday read your uncorrected advice.
> MY way was the safe way.
Either you are ignorant or you are lying.
>
> carl
>
John Doe
> Rod Speed wrote:
>> ...
> funny how my suggestion, very much akin to one several others made
> before you poked your beak in, FIXED THE PROBLEM.
It was you who poked your beak in. The others replied to the
original post.
This is what you said.
"your drive no longer remembers what kind of partitions are on it.
cloning it would simply clone the "empty" disk. you need to restore
that memory in order to access the information in there"
If it were cloning an empty disk, recovery tools would not work. Of
course you know it's not empty.
Apparently there you are also suggesting that accessing the
information is all that's important. That is plainly wrong. Having a
copy of files is as important as accessing them. You need to
reinforce that concept to people who don't know better, unless maybe
you enjoy your job too much.
Others suggested what you did. I did not complain about their
suggestions. The original poster had to decide whether her files
were important enough to clone the drive before manipulating data on
the drive.
>
> carl
>
>
>
> Path: newssvr13.news.prodigy.com!newsdbm04.news.prodigy.com!newsdst01.news.prodigy.net!prodigy.com!newscon06.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.net!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!postnews.google.com!m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
> From: caterbro my-deja.com
> Newsgroups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt
> Subject: Re: HD no longer recognizable by XP pro once used in XP Home
> Date: 3 Jul 2006 19:15:38 -0700
> Organization: http://groups.google.com
> Lines: 108
> Message-ID: <1151979338.431571.8080 m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com>
> References: <mc3ea2la725e1t22k8ohepig3vh11sms5j 4ax.com> <Xns97F3CEF79560C0123456789 207.115.17.102> <p8nfa21rsdaq5ldcpaudn26tbj184rppur 4ax.com> <1151857447.633066.251860 p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com> <Xns97F48E28BB6B50123456789 207.115.17.102> <1151932501.812973.224450 v61g2000cwv.googlegroups.com> <4gt46tF1oomt9U1 individual.net> <1151974574.845529.17970 v61g2000cwv.googlegroups.com> <4gtv0oF1l7cvhU1 individual.net>
> NNTP-Posting-Host: 209.6.150.237
> Mime-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
> X-Trace: posting.google.com 1151979344 19497 127.0.0.1 (4 Jul 2006 02:15:44 GMT)
> X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse google.com
> NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 4 Jul 2006 02:15:44 +0000 (UTC)
> In-Reply-To: <4gtv0oF1l7cvhU1 individual.net>
> User-Agent: G2/0.2
> X-HTTP-UserAgent: Opera/9.00 (Windows NT 5.1; U; en),gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe)
> Complaints-To: groups-abuse google.com
> Injection-Info: m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com; posting-host=209.6.150.237; posting-account=3FtGOgwAAAClxxoT73vOV_a65f7vOm7y
> Xref: prodigy.net alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt:470221
>
>
cate...@my-deja.com
Rod Speed wrote:
> Never ever could bullshit your way out of a wet paper bag.
how.... moronic of you.
> >> Irrelevant to your stupid pig ignorant
> >> claim TO JOHN, that imaging is useless.
>
> > cite.
>
> That stupid pig ignorant claim that you keep deleting from the
> quoting and I keep restoring, you pathetic excuse for a bullshit artist.
when *I* ask for a cite, that is, a "citation", that is YOUR cue to
provide ME with the original text, preferably in quotations, that you
are referring to.
that way, I could easily see whether or not you are under some
misapprehension about what i wrote originally. this is known as
"arguement".
in fact here's the link AGAIN:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt/msg/043ab348409be31b?dmode=source
so lets try this agian: you quote me, make an objection to it, and i
will respond.
otherwise, you are full of shit. ripe, stinking shit, like a dead
coyote on the road with a cork up its ass and 8 pounds of rotting
armadillo in its bowels.
carl
cate...@my-deja.com
John Doe wrote:
> It was you who poked your beak in. The others replied to the
> original post.
actually, made the first reply to the original post, suggesting the use
of TestDisk.
for brevity, here is a link to that first post i made, unrelated to the
discussion we are now having:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt/msg/043ab348409be31b?dmode=source
the OP then replied and said that that had solved her problem:
> This is what you said.
>
> "your drive no longer remembers what kind of partitions are on it.
> cloning it would simply clone the "empty" disk. you need to restore
> that memory in order to access the information in there"
>
> If it were cloning an empty disk, recovery tools would not work. Of
> course you know it's not empty.
yes, that was a secondary reply i made to one of the OP's follow up
questions, and to some extent, i accept your criticism i could have
been more detailed.
however, i put the word "empty" in quotes as seen above, to indicate
that the drive was NOT actually empty- just that image would appear
exactly as the drive had- unformatted
> Apparently there you are also suggesting that accessing the
> information is all that's important. That is plainly wrong. Having a
> copy of files is as important as accessing them. You need to
> reinforce that concept to people who don't know better, unless maybe
> you enjoy your job too much.
well, we will have to agree to disagree here- there is lots of
troubleshooting one can do before imaging a drive, and recovering the
MBR is one of them in this particular situation.
at the next level, i certainly would reccomend an image; i just don't
agree that it's the right first step here.
somewhere down the list, someone posting with a clicking hard drive- in
that case i would reccomend making an image ASAP- in fact, if the drive
were in operation, i would back up important files off the drive FIRST,
then attempt an on-the-fly image to an external drive, then a reboot
and image, since a drive with damaged heads may never work again once
it's powered down.
in that case, the fix could something obscenely simple, like an
overvolting PSU, but i would still reccomend backing up before all
else.
in this case, no. I don't think i'm being unreasonable, nor am i
offering poor advice to try a program like TestDisk before going
through the trouble of imaging a drive.
> Others suggested what you did. I did not complain about their
> suggestions. The original poster had to decide whether her files
> were important enough to clone the drive before manipulating data on
> the drive.
that's the trick of it- scanning the drive and/or attempting to restore
the MBR does not in any way manipulate the data on the drive, with the
obvious exception of the first sector of the drive.
carl
cate...@my-deja.com
John Doe wrote:
> cate...@my-deja.com wrote:
>
> > there is nothing wrong with imaging the drive; there are few
> > simpler, quicker and cheaper steps to take before that. that's
> > all.
>
> Quicker and cheaper, Yes. To take before that, No.
we will simply have to move on in separate spheres on this subject.
i do appreciate the reasonable response.
> > OK- assume it's an 80GB consumer drive- she needs another of the
> > same maker or a bigger drive- that's $85.
>
> You mean $50 unless a friend has one. Or you could use DVDs.
if you have a DVD burner and enough blank DVDs, and they are known for
the occasional bad burn too; you are stacking variable on variable,
here- as well as uneeded expense; that is my major objection, when, in
a case like this, the likely solution is essentially free. the
overwhelming benefit lies in taking the quickest, easiest way out,
since the risk is vanishingly small.
in other situations i would reccomend other practices.
> > MY way was the safe way.
>
> Either you are ignorant or you are lying.
no, scanning a drive and looking for and/or recovering MBR information
is perfectly safe, provided you have the right tools
i submit that you are the one who is ignorant, unless you can tell me
in technical detail, why such a practice is unsafe. assume the original
situation (a drive that operates perfectly but shows up as
unformatted), and the use of reliable software, such as TestDisk.
carl
JAD
Shits.
You are at the proverbial dueling troll bridge. Each troll tries to out do
themselves for as long as they can keep it going. Bottom line...the thread
is over and after reading what fixed it I imagine this whole thing could
have been fixed with a 'FDISK /MBR' . The only tool needed was a dos utility
disk.
cate...@my-deja.com
oh, well, in that case, i retire from the field. i thought iwas one guy
with a obsession about drive imaging and a ding-a-ling from outer space
i was arguing with.
ta,
carl
John Doe
> John Doe wrote:
>
>> It was you who poked your beak in. The others replied to the
>> original post.
>
> actually, made the first reply to the original post, suggesting
> the use of TestDisk.
If you know everything, that should have been enough for you.
> ... attempting to restore the MBR does not in any way manipulate
> the data on the drive,
That's false.
> with the obvious exception of the first sector of the drive.
You learn something new every nanosecond.
Not to mention what a low level utility can do in the hands of
someone who doesn't even know enough to keep a copy of important
files.
I probably would not have told the original poster how to clone the
drive because it was over her head (you butted in and provided that
information). My intention was mainly to scold her for not having
copies of important files.
People come here crying about potential/actual loss of files from a
failing or dead hard drive. Now that there are USB flash drives, we
can prevent that problem for many of them. Saving data to CDs/DVDs
is an era that won't be missed. I could go up and jump on your post
giving bad advice about that. Apparently you just had to chime in
on the subject. But instead I'll let the user decide for herself
whether she wants to screw around with CDs/DVDs (could be part of
the reason she currently doesn't have backups) or to do it the easy
way by simply dragging My Documents (and maybe others) to a USB
flash drive from within Windows Explorer.
>
>
>
> carl
>
>
>
> Path: newssvr13.news.prodigy.com!newsdbm04.news.prodigy.com!newsdst01.news.prodigy.net!prodigy.com!newscon06.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.net!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!postnews.google.com!j8g2000cwa.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
> From: cate...@my-deja.com
> Newsgroups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt
> Subject: Re: HD no longer recognizable by XP pro once used in XP Home
> Date: 4 Jul 2006 07:07:30 -0700
> Organization: http://groups.google.com
> Lines: 76
> Message-ID: <1152022050.2...@j8g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
> References: <mc3ea2la725e1t22k...@4ax.com> <Xns97F3CEF795...@207.115.17.102> <p8nfa21rsdaq5ldcp...@4ax.com> <1151857447.6...@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com> <Xns97F48E28BB...@207.115.17.102> <1151932501.8...@v61g2000cwv.googlegroups.com> <4gt46tF...@individual.net> <1151974574....@v61g2000cwv.googlegroups.com> <4gtv0oF...@individual.net> <1151979338....@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com> <Xns97F6147999...@207.115.17.102>
> NNTP-Posting-Host: 209.6.150.237
> Mime-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
> X-Trace: posting.google.com 1152022055 3399 127.0.0.1 (4 Jul 2006 14:07:35 GMT)
> X-Complaints-To: groups...@google.com
> NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 4 Jul 2006 14:07:35 +0000 (UTC)
> In-Reply-To: <Xns97F6147999...@207.115.17.102>
> User-Agent: G2/0.2
> X-HTTP-UserAgent: Opera/9.00 (Windows NT 5.1; U; en),gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe)
> Complaints-To: groups...@google.com
> Injection-Info: j8g2000cwa.googlegroups.com; posting-host=209.6.150.237; posting-account=3FtGOgwAAAClxxoT73vOV_a65f7vOm7y
> Xref: prodigy.net alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt:470266
>
>
John Doe
> Elora_Grace yahooo.com wrote:
>> Thanks again to you and all the others who responded. :))
>
> hooray!!! :) now, make some backup CDs right away! ;)
The era of messing with CD burners and awkward Windows
copying is at its end.
If all the original poster needs to do is backup My Documents,
backup CDs are obsolete. Instead, a USB flash drive might be
user-friendly enough to encourage her into making backups.
> carl
>
>
>
> Path: newssvr13.news.prodigy.com!newsdbm04.news.prodigy.com!newsdst01.news.prodigy.net!prodigy.com!newscon06.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.net!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!postnews.google.com!j8g2000cwa.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
> From: caterbro my-deja.com
> Newsgroups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt
> Subject: Re: HD no longer recognizable by XP pro once used in XP Home <SOLVED>
> Date: 3 Jul 2006 09:09:58 -0700
> Organization: http://groups.google.com
> Lines: 39
> Message-ID: <1151942998.703047.22120 j8g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
> References: <mc3ea2la725e1t22k8ohepig3vh11sms5j 4ax.com> <1151802048.283363.327480 75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <n76ga251tg628ucuo4r2qcqe4ncarpbjvn 4ax.com>
> NNTP-Posting-Host: 209.6.150.237
> Mime-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
> X-Trace: posting.google.com 1151943003 3084 127.0.0.1 (3 Jul 2006 16:10:03 GMT)
> X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse google.com
> NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 3 Jul 2006 16:10:03 +0000 (UTC)
> In-Reply-To: <n76ga251tg628ucuo4r2qcqe4ncarpbjvn 4ax.com>
> User-Agent: G2/0.2
> X-HTTP-UserAgent: Opera/9.00 (Windows NT 5.1; U; en),gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe)
> Complaints-To: groups-abuse google.com
> Injection-Info: j8g2000cwa.googlegroups.com; posting-host=209.6.150.237; posting-account=3FtGOgwAAAClxxoT73vOV_a65f7vOm7y
> Xref: prodigy.net alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt:470170
>
>
cate...@my-deja.com
John Doe wrote:
> > hooray!!! :) now, make some backup CDs right away! ;)
>
> The era of messing with CD burners and awkward Windows
> copying is at its end.
the XP CD Burner is dead simple to use and bombproof. drag files to the
drive, click, "write these files to CD" and presto. hell, you can even
tell NTbackup to burn cds on a schedule- it'll automagically open the
tray for you, and spit it back out when finished. it ain't that hard,
it's cheap, and it's sturdy.
> If all the original poster needs to do is backup My Documents,
> backup CDs are obsolete. Instead, a USB flash drive might be
> user-friendly enough to encourage her into making backups.
USB flash drives are not %100 reliable, nor are they permanent storage.
they have a life span, they are of radically mixed quality, they are
sensitive to electromagnetic interference, and recovering data from
them is exponentially harder than a HDD if they fail. don't rely on
them for a backup. use them for what they are intended for - file
transfers and general utility.
make a CD once a month, stick on the shelf, carry on as before. or
whatever, there's lots of answers.
carl
Rod Speed
> Rod Speed wrote
>>>> Irrelevant to your stupid pig ignorant
>>>> claim TO JOHN, that imaging is useless.
>>> cite.
>> That stupid pig ignorant claim that you keep deleting from the quoting
>> and I keep restoring, you pathetic excuse for a bullshit artist.
> when *I* ask for a cite, that is, a "citation", that is YOUR cue to provide
> ME with the original text, preferably in quotations, that you are referring to.
I quoted your pig ignorant shit in the usual way, only to have you repeatedly
delete it from the quoting, you pathetic excuse for a bullshit artist.
Rod Speed
Only a fool or someone in a situation where imaging the drive
isnt feasible would be stupid enough to run something that a
blow hard like you suggests without imaging the drive first.
John Doe
Path: newssvr13.news.prodigy.com!newsdbm04.news.prodigy.com!newsdst01.news.prodigy.net!prodigy.com!newscon06.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.net!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!postnews.google.com!j8g2000cwa.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
From: caterbro my-deja.com
Newsgroups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt
Subject: Re: HD no longer recognizable by XP pro once used in XP Home <SOLVED>
Date: 4 Jul 2006 10:28:22 -0700
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Lines: 30
Message-ID: <1152034102.801648.207440 j8g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
References: <mc3ea2la725e1t22k8ohepig3vh11sms5j 4ax.com> <1151802048.283363.327480 75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <n76ga251tg628ucuo4r2qcqe4ncarpbjvn 4ax.com> <1151942998.703047.22120 j8g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <Xns97F6782C4485C0123456789 207.115.17.102>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 209.6.150.237
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1152034108 30282 127.0.0.1 (4 Jul 2006 17:28:28 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 4 Jul 2006 17:28:28 +0000 (UTC)
In-Reply-To: <Xns97F6782C4485C0123456789 207.115.17.102>
User-Agent: G2/0.2
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Opera/9.00 (Windows NT 5.1; U; en),gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe)
Complaints-To: groups-abuse google.com
Injection-Info: j8g2000cwa.googlegroups.com; posting-host=209.6.150.237; posting-account=3FtGOgwAAAClxxoT73vOV_a65f7vOm7y
Xref: prodigy.net alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt:470276