Agreed, quality wise at least. Even the "standard" videos on there are a quality YT can only dream of, (even in HD!!).
From what you're saying I don't think you're going to recover the partition as it was. You're only option to get the data is to use the data recovery software and copy it on to another partition/disc.
If the EASEUS software isn't seeing the data in its normal directory structure it's because the file system is corrupted. If the file system is ok it will show all the directory structure and files in their normal places. Either way copying it to another partition is going to be your only option as far as I can see.
You're dealing with a messed up disc, you just have to accept that you're not going to be able to recover a perfect "copy" of the data as it was on the disc before it got messed up.
If the EASEUS software isn't seeing the data in its normal directory structure it's because the file system is corrupted. If the file system is ok it will show all the directory structure and files in their normal places. Either way copying it to another partition is going to be your only option as far as I can see.
You're dealing with a messed up disc, you just have to accept that you're not going to be able to recover a perfect "copy" of the data as it was on the disc before it got messed up.
Exactly what I was thinking. 1080p on youtube is just so much marketing garbage. Even if you had a 30" monitor 720p would be more than good enough quality if it were using a decent MPEG encoder and high enough bitrate.
As a point of reference, DVD's only run 575 resolution but still average 5-6 Mb/s off the disc even with MPEG compression. Most peoples broadband can't even cover that let alone 720 or 1080.
The main concern for any equipment environment is heat. The issue isn't about getting fresh air in, but to remove heat from the room.
The use of air con in server rooms is a never ending battle, (the result of using non-purpose built rooms converted from generalised office space), because they spend their entire time trying to cool down the environment which is being heated by the equipment.
The best way to approach cooling is to suck out the hot air from the top of the room and allow cool air in through the flooring. The closest you can get to that ideal is what you should be aiming for.
The use of air con in server rooms is a never ending battle, (the result of using non-purpose built rooms converted from generalised office space), because they spend their entire time trying to cool down the environment which is being heated by the equipment.
The best way to approach cooling is to suck out the hot air from the top of the room and allow cool air in through the flooring. The closest you can get to that ideal is what you should be aiming for.
BS !! The distinction between Hacker and Cracker is a modern one created by "hackers" in order to attempt to give themselves legitimacy when in fact they know full well that what they do, (by breaking in to systems), is morally reprehensible. They claim that they do it purely as an "intellectual" exersize. Yeah sure which is why 99.99999% of hackers in the world are under 20 and fit the motivation and description Tris is giving perfectly. The other 0.00001% of hackers are actually on company payrolls, are called security professionals, and it is their job to attempt to circumnavigate system security systems in order to improve it.
That's because (any) partition manager isn't designed to extract individual files, only work with partitions as a whole. So it can copy entire partitions but not individualy recover data from within a partition.
Such software may well show the structure and files within the partition but this is solely to lend confidence to the user that the software is really working and also to ensure you choose the correct partition to work with.
Same for Disc Imaging software, which is designed to back up whole discs or partitions but not individual files, (that's what "back up" software is for), which often allows you to see the contents of a partition or disc.
Edited to add - CSU is refering to the disc encryption functionality that is built in to Windows 7 Ultimate edition. If you encrypt a disc, recovery software will be unable to recover the data as it will not know the method of encryption of the data.
Last edited by gezmoor, .
There will still be a partition on the drive, it will just be a single partition covering the entire drive. If find and mount doesn't even find a partition structure then the file system must be completely messed up.
The closest I've seen to this myself is for a customer where F&M saw the partition but couldn't read any of the data inside. I ended up using "Data recovery wizard" from EASEUS.
http://www.easeus.com/datarecoverywizard/
You can "trial" it first to see if it will recover anything useful, in demo mode it will allow you to "preview" whatever files etc it can recover but won't let you recover them. You'll have to pay for it to actually recover the data. Of course not everything will be recoverable if the file structure is bad enough for F&M not to work.
As far as I'm aware there are no free programs that will recover data, when things get that bad. I've looked and was unable to find any so I ended up paying for some. Data recovery is far to large a commercial market for software companies to give the software away free.
Last edited by gezmoor, .
Huh? I'd have thought it was pretty self explanatory. Essentially any information that relates to you as an individual. (eg addresses, photo's, friends & family etc).
The logical conclusion of "cloud computing" is that all of this information will no longer reside on your home pc, which will become a "dumb terminal", and will be located within the "cloud" network. i.e. on servers and databases belonging to the companies running the network.
Call me old fasioned, but personally I have no interest in putting my entire life on "the web" and trusting all my data etc to the hands of people I don't know, working for companies in some other part of the world.
I'll use the internet as a resource and that's it. All other computing, I will always trust to my own physical device located in my personally secured environment where I control who has access to it.
So called "cloud computing" is one of the dumbest ideas ever IMO.
T-Mobile are the latest company to get in to hot water over rogue employees selling customer details to third parties.
Sorry, but I'll never trust other people with anything but the absolute minimum of my personal information.
I'll use the internet as a resource and that's it. All other computing, I will always trust to my own physical device located in my personally secured environment where I control who has access to it.
So called "cloud computing" is one of the dumbest ideas ever IMO.
T-Mobile are the latest company to get in to hot water over rogue employees selling customer details to third parties.
Sorry, but I'll never trust other people with anything but the absolute minimum of my personal information.
Have you tried, Find & Mount?
http://findandmount.com/
Unless the file system is corrupt it should find all the data, and it's free. Just make sure you do the thorogh scan and wait for it to complete. It will take a few hours with a 500Gb drive though.
If that doesn't work, give EASEUS Data recovery wizard a try. Use the demo first to see if it will find the data you want, then if it does you'll need to buy it to actually recover the data, it's not as expensive as others though.
http://www.easeus.com/datarecoverywizard/
I'll see your Rotties and Boerboels and raise you a Ridgeback.
oh dear.. am I transgressing? is this not the off topic section of a discussion forum? and there was me thinking people could discuss whatever they liked... silly me
They did? funny I thought it was the Chinese that built all the arks
/sarcasmYes the neutrinos mutating .. hmm...the slightly ruffled hair when standing only a couple of miles from the explosive erruption of a super volcano..hmmm... the being swamped by superheated gasses and debri from said supervolcano and being able to fly out of it .. hmmm .. the "having a vote" to open the doors to let in all the plebs just minutes from disaster.. hmmm
Oh good greif.. I could go on ad nauseum, but the bit that I really didn't like is that every escape from death was a typical "by the skin of their teeth/split second to go" kind which I find so infuriating in the first place and this film was one after another after another. That and the vomit inducing "lovey dovey" ness and cliche "look how wonderful us humans are really" self congratulatory rubbish that americans are want to spew out in their films.
Even the special affects were rubbish. Very few of them looked realistic and were so obviously computer generated as to be shocking in all honesty.
Can you tell I didn't like it yet?
It was all just too much though. The film is just full of cliches, everywhere, non stop. Thats what I didn't like about it.
Mostly not the same reasons I didn't like it, (see above), but I agree with the ending bit. Oh and yeah, I'm not usually cynical about such films, being as I am perfectly willing to suspend disbelief, but there were some "irregularities" in the film that even I couldn't over look.
2012 - dont !! * SPOILERS *
Just don't... spend your hard earned cash on seeing it that is.
One of the worst films I've seen in a long time. That's all I'm going to say.....
One of the worst films I've seen in a long time. That's all I'm going to say.....
Last edited by gezmoor, .
On Windows maybe. But I've yet to see any Cisco network environment in which Telnet isn't used extensively to manage the boxes.
Sure, probably true. But Vista has been out a few years and it shouldn't require a new PC in order to run well. Plus, it's a well established mechanism for assesing an OSs resource use and efficiency by seeing how well it works on older spec machines. The very fact that Windows 7 can run better on machines that Vista baulks at is a testament to it's improvement.
Except it's not, because it's had revisions of the kernel. By definition any OS that has had a kernel revision is more than just a "facelift".
Anyway, even it it was "just" a facelift, that just goes further to prove how much MS messed up by releasing Vista when they did. All the talk of benchmarks is completely missing the point. Vista and Windows 7 are products and will be viewed by the general public as such, not as games test platforms. The general public care as much (if not more) how easy an OS is to use and how it "feels" in use than how fast it is. It's exactly that ease of use that has led to Windows popularity and a large part of the reason that it has never been challenged by the likes of Unix/OS X/Linux etc despite their inherent superiority in significant ways for a long time, (not so much if at all now though).
No it's not fixed by SP1/SP2. Improved I agree, but not fixed. Vista still sits and waits for a long time before it starts it's copying compared to XP. The larger the file or the more files you're trying to move/copy the worse the lag is while it sits there "calculating".
Seeing as you're so fond of quoting figures, do you know exactly how the benchmarks were carried out? As someone with a scientifc/engineering background myself I am very aware of the significance of testing methodology on determining results. Having not seen the tests I won't argue with the figures you're quoting, but I must say that the majority of benchmark testing articles I've ever seen are very good at reproducing pages and pages of numbers, and describing the test "environment", but tend to fall down quite significantly on explaining in detail the exact method used to carry out the tests.
A proper and rigourous test paper would consist of significant amounts of detail describing the exact methodology of the testing. Usually significantly more of the paper is given to the methodology than the actual results themselves. Almost the complete opposite to what is usually seen in most computer magazine/website "evaluations".
Any luck getting rid of the virus?
Don't get me wrong, I agree SSDs are the way forward, (at least until some other better technology comes along), and there is no doubt that they offer better performance. Just think it is going to be quite a long time before they become mainstream, (if ever), given the ridiculously low prices of traditional HDDs, (which are only likely to continue getting bigger/cheaper).
I've got three, and for me at least they are enough to spend the money.
1. Vista lags a lot when you ask it to do almost anything. File copying is a prime example. For god knows what reason it just sits there for anything up to 30 seconds before it starts to transfer anything. Then it does similar things when opening most applications, 3-5 second lag before the app opens. Windows 7 does neither.
2. For some bizare reason in Vista, if I open any Office document and then just close it again without making any modifications what-so-ever it asks me if I want to save the changes. It never did that when I used the exact same installation of office in XP and it doesn't do it in Windows 7.
3. Windows 7 has finally changed a behaviour of all previous versions of windows that has always annoyed the hell out of me. Namely the insistence of bringing all windows to "active" status when they finish whatever task they may have been doing in an "inactive" window status. I've lost count of the number of times I've been typing an email or word document etc only for it to switch to another application which windows has decided I MUST attend to when IT wants me to !! Windows 7 treats the user like they have a brain and lets them decide to go back and check if the background task has finished for themselves.
So there you go.. three advantages of Windows 7 over Vista for starters. At least to me they're advantages.
Not at all surprised by the relative numbers of XP, Vista and Windows 7 votes. A magazine article I read recently showed the results of a count done back in September, (by Micromart magazine of users of their website), which showed the following:
XP: 60%
Vista: 22%
Windows 7: 2%
Plus all the others.
Even prior to actually being released Windows 7 already had a 2% penetration of that particular user base. Compare that with 7% for Mac OS X and 1.8% for Linux.
I get the feeling that Windows 7 is going to be a big success for MS.
XP: 60%
Vista: 22%
Windows 7: 2%
Plus all the others.
Even prior to actually being released Windows 7 already had a 2% penetration of that particular user base. Compare that with 7% for Mac OS X and 1.8% for Linux.
I get the feeling that Windows 7 is going to be a big success for MS.
Problem is without benchmarks that empirically measure this "snappyness" then it's just a subjective statement which doesn't really have any meaning. When I loaded Windows 7 RC as a dual boot on my current machine it felt "snappier" too, but I couldn't in all honesty tell you what that means. Untill it's measureable in a quatifiable way it's not possible to put a value on whether it's worth the extra expense. My guess is not as it stands given the huge premium required for SSD units.
So far the only quantifiable measurement relating to load times is that for booting the OS, and to be honest despite being a significant improvement I was kind of expecting much lower times, i.e. under 15 seconds, (an old 1Ghz Athlon XP box that I used to have booted up the OS in just over 30 seconds with a normal HDD!!), given that we're effectively talking about a purely electrical memory retrieval system here.
Edited to add- My current dual core 2.4Ghz machine takes approx 45 seconds to boot the OS (Bios to Vista desktop), a good 10-15 seconds slower than my old Athlon machine did with XP - Progress huh?
Last edited by gezmoor, .
Are you sure your CD drive is still working? Try sticking another bootable CD in the drive and see if it boots from it. Unless the Original XP CD is scratched or something, the only reason it won't boot up from it, if the CD Drive is the 1st option boot drive is if the drive itself, (or IDE channel), is faulty.
Slow in- Fast out was a mantra that was created to try and combat the inexperienced drivers belief that diving in to corners as fast as possible was the best way to drive. No more, no less.
The exact technique on the fastest way to take a corner depends on a combination of the amount of grip and power available to the individual vehicle.
In Motorcycle racing for example. In the old 2-stroke days, the 250cc GP bikes were actually faster through the apex than the 500c bikes. However, over the entire lap they were slower because of the 500cc bikes obvious power and hence acceleration advantage.
The exact technique on the fastest way to take a corner depends on a combination of the amount of grip and power available to the individual vehicle.
In Motorcycle racing for example. In the old 2-stroke days, the 250cc GP bikes were actually faster through the apex than the 500c bikes. However, over the entire lap they were slower because of the 500cc bikes obvious power and hence acceleration advantage.
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG