En (e-mail address removed),
modiftek va escriure:
Antoine:
We can all go into semantics and use different adjectives to
describe the problems we have with our computers. My idea of a
"dead" hard drive is one that does not spin-up and eventually
become unrecognizable by the system BIOS.
So, it does not match the description of the OP, does it?
He was able including to /start/ a Chkdsk over the letter, he said.
Also, I used quotes to highlight that the word was improper. As you said,
this is just semantics. Please feel free to correct my post reading
"defective" instead.
Also, I am amazed that you would think "fiddling cables or BIOS
settings" is out of bounds when troubleshooting hard drive issues.
OK, I was expressing myself badly. Sorry, English is not my native language.
I meant that if the drive is still (in part) readable, one should try to
recover the datas before opening the hood. At least, this is what I was
taught. And when I went the other way (opening the hood as first measure) I
got worse results. I am not really a technician, in fact. Not much cases to
deal with (and I am happy this way: I do not like being called as the guy to
recover the datas despite no backups, while the disks are now "defective"
.... or "dead"; people are happy when /luckily/ I might help, but I feel it
is better to not have to call me and just use the backup).
I was not considering the case it was the first boot of the drive.
If it really is so, you are probably right. And in this case there are no
data to save, so my advice would have been useless anyway.
And finally, if you look at the last paragraph in my initial
response you will see I mentioned "eventuality", and read
carefully because you might not see it if you are unfamiliar
with repartitioning / formatting, bad sectors and recovery of
lost allocation units.
What do you mean? Now you are intriguing me. I did not see the word
"eventuality" in the message I answered, only suggestions. I am perhaps not
as knowledgeable as you are; furthermore, I never saw messages about
"recovering lost allocation units" while _formatting_ (of course, this has
to do that I usually use systems in other language than English, and
translations are usually bad). _Particularly_ not if I changed the partition
scheme before (which means "quick" format is not an option). So I would
welcome an explanation of you about the subtlety you put there initially.
Also, what do you really mean by "repartition", as an advice to a guy that
is not versed in the black arts of playing with partitions?
My view is that if Joe User uses windisk or fdisk or anything similar to
"repartition" a disk, it will end basically with the same setup as he had
while starting (less access to the datas): whole disk assigned as one big
partition, usually.
Or is it just a way to ensure "not quick" format erasing the boot sector?
Thanks for the explanations,
Antoine