Seeking a good hard drive recovery service
A friend of mine emailed me recently with a question that I can't answer. He has a friend whose hard drive has croaked, possibly due to a power surge caused by a lightning storm. She'd like to get as much of the data back as possible, but the usual recovery methods don't seem to be working because the drive's control logic appears to be fried.
The question is: Do you know of a good, reliable, and reasonably affordable service capable of recovering a drive's data in such a situation? Quick turnaround isn't a high priority here, if that helps. Fortunately for me, I've not had to go down that path, so I don't know any place to recommend.
Thanks to a previous conversation here, I do know that if the drive itself is still responsive, GetDataBack is a nice tool for recovering deleted files or inaccessible data on a corrupted volume. I've used it myself and recommend it.
I've also had success swapping in the control logic from another, almost-identical drive and recovering the data, but it's not a procedure I'd recommend to the average guy. I just happened to have multiple copies of the same drive on hand, and I didn't have much to lose. The drive made some scary noises with the transplanted control logic, but it worked long enough for me to grab the data I wanted.
What if a professional data recovery service is needed? Any recommendations?
14 comments
—
Last post by jazper at 5:07 AM on July 4, 2008
I haven't written about this yet, but I probably should before too much time passes. A couple of months ago, I finally decided that the last iteration of the Damagebox, based on an Athlon 64 X2 3800 overclocked to 2.4GHz, had served me well long enough. It was time to upgrade my main PC.
Now, mind you, this system isn't exactly the typical enthusiast desktop, since it sits in my office and serves as my main work PC. My willingness to tinker with it is limited by my fear of unproductive downtime. On top of that, I've migrated almost all of my gaming activities over to my GPU test rigs, since they're attached to the gorgeous 30" LCD that I, ahem, must have for graphics testing. (These things happen, and we must learn to accept them.)
My main PC's workload became even lighter when I built a storage server that sits in the corner of my office handling file, print and other various services for my network. In the past, my own system served as Damage Labs' main file and print server, which could become inconvenient when my wife wanted to print a document while I was halfway into installing new video drivers or otherwise tinkering.
So really, my Athlon 64 X2-based system wasn't terribly burdened or slow at what I was asking it to do—mostly a mix of web surfing, email, IMs, Skype conferencing, MP3 playback, file downloads, web editing, spreadsheets, and image processing, sprawled across dual displays—but it was a little bit on the noisy side. When I built it, I put it into a CoolerMaster WaveMaster-style case that I happened to have on hand, and I told myself I'd move in into a quieter case soon. Well, time passed, and that never happened, even though I've had a Sonata II sitting in a box in the corner for most of the life of this system.
Plumber, leaky sink, you know the drill.
In fact, I'd been planning this upgrade long enough to watch some of the hardware I had set aside for the project go out of date. But the fan noise of the old system was grating, and I kind of figured I ought to be using Windows Vista on my main PC just to make myself more familiar with it.
So after rummaging around in Damage Labs for the appropriate parts, deciding which ones I didn't need for test rigs any longer, I put together a system based on the following components.
- Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6800 — Hey, there are benefits to being able to raid the parts bin in Damage Labs every so often. The QX6800 has been superceded by 65nm chips with faster bus speeds and by 45nm chips with faster, well, everything. Still, my testing showed that this 2.93GHz quad Core 2 processor isn't limited by its 1066MHz bus in the vast majority of apps, and, heh, it's a 2.93GHz quad Core 2 processor. This puppy does have an unlocked multiplier, but I haven't taken advantage of it yet—and I may not. Acoustics are my big concern, and higher-bin CPUs typically don't overclock especially well.
- Gigabyte P35-DQ6 — After using the DDR3 version of this board on my CPU test bench, I went out of my way to have Geoff ship me this board from Canada. The P35 chipset doesn't have PCIe 2.0, but it's otherwise current. And really I like what Gigabyte has done with its newer motherboards. The BIOS tweaking page is full-featured and (relatively speaking, at least) easy to understand, and the board gets by with only passive cooling, which was a big plus for this build.
I briefly considered using an XFX nForce 680i SLI mobo instead, but I was concerned about its relatively high power consumption (which turns into heat and thus noise) and support for 45nm processors. The Gigabyte P35 seemed like a better choice overall.
- Visiontek Radeon HD 3850 512MB — This one may surprise those of you expecting to read about, in the Damagebox, a killer new PC. But hear me out. I had originally set aside for use in this system a GeForce 8800 GTS 640MB graphics card, with the expectation that I'd have a more-than-adequate video solution for occasional gaming (when I host small LAN parties for the guys in Damage Labs) that would also be nice and quiet most of the time. I even installed a GTS 640MB card in the box during the initial build.
However, a thought struck me, and the logic of it was inescapable. Based on my own testing, the Radeon HD 3850 512MB offered nearly equivalent 3D performance with markedly lower power consumption, especially at idle, where this card would spend most of its time. I had on hand a Visiontek HD 3850 512MB card I'd ordered for use in a review and never actually needed, complete with a higher-than-stock clock and a very nice dual-slot cooler that ejects hot air from the enclosure. The HD 3850 GPU has HD video decode assist capabilities that the GeForce lacks, and on the P35 chipset, it can run in a dual-card config, which Nvidia prevents GeForces from doing. In what way was the HD 3850 not a better choice?
Also, I have to confess to having a soft spot for the Radeon HD 3850 512MB. AMD produced one of the best video card values in years, yet it was largely overshadowed by the GeForce 9600 GT. In any other year, a card like the 3850 512MB would have been the hottest thing going.
- Dual WD Raptor 150GB drives — The new Raptors weren't out yet when I built this system, so these drives were the fastest SATA hard drives on the market than to their 10K-RPM rotational speed. Performance is definitely snappy. Their relatively low 150GB capacity wasn't a big concern because my storage server holds most of my data, anyhow. I went with RAID 1 for the obvious reason: if one of the drives fails, I'm not out of commission. Not only that, but RAID 1 is simple; the recovery process isn't dependent on a RAID controller understanding much of anything about the array in order to rebuild it. I don't really trust motherboard-class RAID 5 or the like not to botch everything if I happen to mix up the SATA plugs after working inside the PC, let alone in the event of a drive failure.
However, my storage setup is the source of one of my biggest complaints about this build: Raptors are frickin' loud on seek, and Vista keeps the hard drive busy almost constantly, for reasons I mostly understand but still can't quite accept. The acoustic problem is multiplied by the fact that the two Raptors seek together in RAID 1. It's pretty bad—especially, heh, with almost no fan noise to drown it out. I've told myself I'll buy a pair of newer, relatively quick 7200-RPM drives to replace the Raptors eventually.
- Antec Sonata II — Yep, it was time to pull the Sonata II out of the corner. My first act, after unboxing it, was to remove the power supply, since it was old enough not to have the requisite complement of power connectors for my mobo and only a single PCIe six-pin aux lead. After that, the build was a snap, since the Sonata is simply a well-designed case with a smart layout. Of course, it's also pretty darned quiet, with its single, 120mm exhaust fan. Without using the default Antec power supply, I couldn't get PSU-based speed control for that fan, but the big fan comes with a three-way manual speed switch. I was able to leave it on its lowest setting at the end of the day, which is slow and stealthy.
- CoolerMaster 850W PSU — Ok, so I'm writing this on an airplane, and I don't recall the exact model PSU I used. It's an 850 CoolerMaster with something like a 130mm single fan in it and enough power connectors and capacity to support a quad-core CPU, dual graphics cards, and a full complement of drives in the Sonata's bays. Perhaps it's overkill, but I had it on hand and wasn't using it otherwise. And it's blessedly quiet.
Initially, I installed another PSU with a big fan, an OCZ GameXStream 700W. I've used these in my test systems for ages, and they've quieted down the confines of Damage Labs considerably. However, I was surprised to learn that once it was installed in this case and powering everything, the GameXStream tended to crank up its fan speed quite a bit—even at idle. That simply wouldn't do, and swapping it out in favor of the CoolerMaster bought me a nice reduction in overall fan noise.
- Zalman CNPS-9500 LED — If you're getting the idea that achieving the best acoustics in this box was an iterative process, good for you. The Zalman was perhaps the biggest surprise of this whole build, even though I've known for ages that these CPU coolers are excellent. Initially, I decided to go with a stock Intel cooler, for several reasons: because I thought it would be sufficiently quiet at idle, because it had a four-pin connector for linear fan speed control, and because it would fit inside of the Sonata II's funky cooling shroud thingamajig.
Turns out, based on my casual evaluation, that shroud is pretty much no help, either with system temperatures or acoustics. I soon gave up on it, and it's no surprise Antec left it out of the Sonata III.
The stock Intel cooler wasn't horrible, but it was loud enough to bug me once I had the PSU fan under control. The QX6800 is a 130W processor, and I considered dropping down to a Q6600. However, my major concern was idle noise, and SpeedStep would remove any difference between the QX6800 and Q6600 at idle. So I decided to try the Zalman.
This meant tearing the motherboard out of the now the fully built system. The Zalman's mounting bracket must be installed on the underside of the board, so there was no way around it. On top of that, Gigabyte mounts a big hunk of copper below the CPU socket on some of its DQ6 boards, and that gets in the way of the Zalman's bracket. I had to remove it, which is possible, but still a pain.
Gigabyte made it up to me by providing near-perfect automatic speed control for my older Zalman 9500's three-pin fan. I test cooling and acoustics on most new builds using the combination of a multithreaded Prime95 torture test, a windowed 3D graphics demo, and whatever temperature monitoring software works with the mobo. Happily, Gigabyte's smart fan control kept the Zalman spinning at very low RPMs at idle and only ramped up incrementally as needed under load, with no obvious transitions from one speed to the next and—blessedly—no tendency to flail back and forth between speed levels.
Not that I could really hear the Zalman's fan, anyhow. The thing just wasn't working very hard. With the stock cooler, CPU temps were flirting with 80°C with all four cores fully loaded, nearly into thermal throttling territory. With the Zalman, temps dropped to between 60 and 65° max, even with relatively low fan speeds. At idle, it was less than a whisper. This was a nice reminder about the worth of a good aftermarket CPU cooler, both for temperatures and for acoustics.
- 4GB of Crucial DDR2-800 memory — With a 64-bit OS, I can actually use all of this memory, and I do need it for editing multiple eight-mega pixel images alongside all of the other multitasking I do—especially, heh, with Vista's memory footprint. The RAM itself is decent memory from a quality vendor, but nothing particularly special. I don't see the point in paying extra for slightly lower latencies or higher clock speeds.
- Auzentech X-Meridian — I had to replace my trusty Revolution 7.1 sound card because it didn't have drivers for 64-bit Vista, and frankly, I was ready to be free of M-Audio's lousy driver support, anyhow. Before this C-Media-based replacement arrived, I used the DQ6's onboard audio for a while, and the sound card was a noticeable improvement. This card produces clear, crisp audio with no annoying overemphasis on highs, lows, or mids. If anything, it's an improvement over the Revo, although I'd have to do a back-to-back comparison to say how much. The drivers are fairly lightweight, unobtrusive, and seem to work fine.
And that's about it. I installed some model of dual-layer SATA DVD writer, of course, and a 273-in-1 flash reader. The system is attached to the same keyboard, mouse, dual 20" Dell LCDs, and APC UPS that I've had forever. I may add a TV tuner card and a remote for use with Vista Media Center, but I haven't done that yet.
The end result brought a huge reduction in fan noise, but the constant seeking of the Raptors kind of spoils the effect. There's more work to be done, I suppose. Overall, though, I'm still fairly pleased with the results.
I guess I should say something about the performance gains, but honestly, they're not blowing me away. Yes, this system is snappier than my Athlon 64 X2, but as I said, I didn't have many complaints about performance before. The X2-based system rarely seemed slow, except when booting, paging from disk when memory got full, or launching a new application. Occasionally, rarely, both CPUs would get occupied when multitasking or when a program went sideways. The new PC seems quicker in all of those cases.
As I've mentioned before, though, I've run into serious problems with Vista network file sharing performance. This is far from ideal, since most of my data resides on a separate box. I've spent quite a bit of time looking into the issue since my last blog post on the subject, and I still haven't found a fix. I'm not sure whether to blame Realtek's drivers, Microsoft's Vista SP1 update, or a combination of the two for the problems, but I'm currently leaning toward Realtek. Some of their more recent driver drops have had changelogs that mention fixes for some scary problems. Unfortunately, they haven't resolved the problem causing my PC to drop connectivity to the file server yet. In all likelihood, my next step will be moving to a discrete NIC to see if that helps.
Beyond that, well, I've had almost no problems with application compatibility or system stability in Vista x64. Of course, I did some planning ahead of time to make sure that my hardware was compatible, including replacing the Revo 7.1 sound card and moving my HP DeskJet all-in-one over to a WinXP-based print server to ensure full support for all of its capabilities. These were reasonable accommodations to make for older hardware, though, and I had planned to make those changes during my next upgrade, regardless.
53 comments
—
Last post by Prototyped at 5:48 AM on June 15, 2008
Check these out:
Coming soon!
24 comments
—
Last post by Sargent Duck at 7:00 PM on May 30, 2008
Several of you have been asking for an update on our progress with the TR Tech Share initiative we kicked off this past Christmas. Our goal was to raise enough money to equip a classroom in a Ugandan school with Asus Eee PC computers, and you all responded generously, donating over $7,700 in order to make that happen. Since then, we've been working to coordinate with all of the parties involved in order to get the computers delivered, the school wired for Internet access, and everything set up and tied together. I'd have to say we somewhat underestimated the amount of time and work it would take to pull everything together, but I'm pleased to report that we have made substantial progress.
At long last, a package arrived at my door yesterday with the first Eee PC, a 4G model. This is the first of 13 Eee PC systems we expect to receive from Asus, ten of which will be 4G Surf models.
We're currently awaiting the delivery of the rest of the systems and contemplating how much setup work we should do before handing them off to the shipping company.
Getting to this point has taken more time than we anticipated for a number of reasons, but we're actually pretty far down the road already.
Before we could order the systems, we had to determine the safest and most economical method of shipping 13 computers into Uganda, which turns out not to be as simple as slapping a FedEx sticker on a box. After some research, Adam identified an import broker that should be able to get the systems into Uganda and arrange for payment of the required import fees without charging an arm and a leg.
We also had to make some decisions about how to make the best use of our budget. After some discussions with the school and local ISPs in Uganda, we believe we can afford to pay for a full year of Internet access for EEC (the Ugandan school), and we're moving to make that happen. We've sorted through the various providers and confirmed local service availability at the school. We've identified a local freelance tech who can help set up the lab and network, as well.
Naturally, we had to get a handle on all of these variables before we knew how many systems we could afford to order. After that, coordinating with Asus took some time, since, as you may have heard, the Eee PC is something of a hot item. Fortunately, that process is now largely complete.
Along the way, Adam has manged to wrangle some additional support from several quarters. NCIX has offered to donate a router and other hardware to help wire the lab, and Gigabyte and Cooler Master offered to kick in extra hardware to help with the cause or attract more donations if needed.
The extra support could be crucial, because we would like very much to be sure that the school gets what it needs to make these computers truly useful. One of our goals is to see that the school gets at least one full-sized laptop for teachers and/or administrators to use to prepare lesson plans or to handle basic day-to-day tasks. The folks at the school, meanwhile, have voiced a request of their own: they'd like to have a printer, which they say could save them quite a bit of money on printing and copy fees. We're pondering how to address these additional needs, but our focus for now is on getting the Eee PCs there and the classroom wired.
So one Eee PC is here, 12 more are on the way, and we believe we have a good grasp of what needs to happen next, how much each piece of the puzzle will cost, and who will be responsible for it. With luck and a little hard work, we should be able to have the classroom wired and working by the time the kids return to school for the fall term, which would be ideal. Thanks again to each of you who contributed to this effort. This is a very cool thing we get to do.
Incidentally, I have to admit that we wavered for a moment on the original plan when the Windows XP version of the Eee PC became available, wondering if the school might not get more utility out of Windows-based systems. Having played around with the Eee PC 4G that arrived here yesterday, though, I'm more convinced than ever that our decision to stick with the Linux version of the Eee PC was the right one. Asus has, quite simply, done exactly the kind of integration work and UI design needed for a classrom PC and web client. All of it makes sense: the Firefox web browser, prominent icons for webmail services and Wikipedia, the included planetarium and periodic table applications, the inclusion of OpenOffice.org, the dead-simple auto-update utility, and the kid-proofing aspect of the default desktop's relatively limited functionality. If the EEC classroom only makes use of the included suite of applications, they will have a very robust set of teaching tools that should require very little maintenance. Color me impressed.
We'll have more updates as things progress. Stay tuned.
14 comments
—
Last post by jazper at 8:22 PM on June 3, 2008
After my post about slow file copies with Windows Vista SP1, some of you offered potential fixes and asked for an update once the problem was resolved. I have been taking a crack at this problem every so often without going into all-out, thrown-down problem-solving mode since the prospect of spending hours ripping up my main PC for a fix that may or may not be possible with current OS and driver revisions doesn't seem especially inviting.
Anyhow, I made another run at the problem again today. Here's a brief recap for you.
The problem is intermittently (very) slow network access, disconnect messages, and intermittent failed copies of large files from a Vista x64 SP1 machine with a Realtek RTL8168B/8111B GigE PCIe NIC to a Windows XP SP2 x86 machine. The problems occur not just in Windows Explorer, but also when I'm saving files with another program, like Firefox downloads or the like. The target machine serves files to any other system on my network (both XP and pre-SP1 Vista systems) quickly and with zero problems.
These problems started with the installation of Vista SP1. So far, I've tried the following measures, with no improvement:
-Updating to RealTek's latest NIC and audio drivers available today
-Enabling jumbo frames with (4K max) manually on both machines
-Manually configuring both NICs for full-duplex gigabit operation
-Setting "netsh interface tcp set global autotuninglevel=highlyrestricted"
-Setting "netsh interface tcp set global autotuninglevel=disabled"
-Accessing the remote system via a mapped drive or a UNC share (happens both ways)
-Disabling my (Avast) antivirus's real-time file scanning and network AV protection modules during a file copy
-Disabling UAC
None of these changes have even moved the needle. The problems are bad enough that everyday use of this machine in our networked environment is a trial. I suppose the next steps may involve hardware changes, such as a discrete NIC. I'd really prefer not to make such a change for an obvious software problem (this all worked fine before the installation of Vista SP1), but there may not be another option here. I've tried pretty much everything suggested in this MS knowledgebase article, with the exception of using robocopy, since resorting to a CLI-based file copy utility isn't a fix; it's a kludgy workaround (and its presence in the KB article suggests this problem must be somewhat intractable).
Sooooo... no good news to report, although I supposed I've learned a lot about what doesn't help. Whee.
26 comments
—
Last post by odizzido at 7:52 AM on May 18, 2008
Recently, I built a storage server for my LAN and migrated all of my important documents over to it. Even more recently, I built myself a new PC and installed Windows Vista x64 on it, with some trepidation about the network file copy performance issues some Vista users have encountered. Happily, though, my system didn't exhibit any such problems, with crisp and speedy performance accessing files via a drive letter mapped to a network share.
Then I upgraded to Vista SP1, which is supposed to banish the problems some folks have been having on this front. My reward was a surprising one: now my system has precisely the sort of problems it didn't have before! I've tried a number of things—installing newer NIC and audio drivers, enabling jumbo frames, disabling UAC, a few other tweaks—but I still get episodes like this:
Lovely. Eventually, the file copy failed outright, as did a few other accesses I had running to that same mapped drive.
The target machine is Windows XP-based, uses the latest hardware, and plays well with all of the others on my network. The only thing that's changed is my machine's upgrade to SP1.
I've spent some time googling around and looking at MS's knowledgebase, but there's no obvious fix. Ugh.
45 comments
—
Last post by Damage at 12:32 PM on April 29, 2008
Just arrived in Damage Labs: our first B3 Phenom, the new silicon revision with the fix for the TLB erratum.
This isn't just an early engineering sample, either; it's a sample of a new Phenom model that should be available soon. And get this: clock speeds are higher than current Phenoms. Could things be looking up for AMD? Stay tuned for a full review... soon.
42 comments
—
Last post by A_Pickle at 4:36 AM on March 27, 2008
