| HDD GURU FORUMS http://forum.hddguru.com/ |
|
| Deepspar V Atola Imager - actual comparison http://forum.hddguru.com/viewtopic.php?f=19&t=14962 |
Page 4 of 4 |
| Author: | drc [ June 24th, 2010, 14:40 ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Deepspar V Atola Imager - actual comparison |
Russwinters wrote: I would say with Ignore ECC, you probably won't end up worse off then if you just didn't image those sectors at all. At least by ignoring ECC, you got SOMETHING out of those sectors that might help some files work. Otherwise that sector is just going to be 00's Sometimes yes, sometimes no... If the data retrieved with ignore-ECC is badly corrupted it can cause all kinds of weird issues in the filesystem |
|
| Author: | Russwinters [ June 24th, 2010, 14:48 ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Deepspar V Atola Imager - actual comparison |
drc wrote: Russwinters wrote: I would say with Ignore ECC, you probably won't end up worse off then if you just didn't image those sectors at all. At least by ignoring ECC, you got SOMETHING out of those sectors that might help some files work. Otherwise that sector is just going to be 00's Sometimes yes, sometimes no... If the data retrieved with ignore-ECC is badly corrupted it can cause all kinds of weird issues in the filesystem I could see how this would be possible, with "partially working" MFT entries, etc. Could cause some problems. |
|
| Author: | mediaman [ June 24th, 2010, 17:01 ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Deepspar V Atola Imager - actual comparison |
Hey Russ, thanks for your answer. Regarding point 2 i Have an as yet unexplained, subtle, doubt: - I image a disk, it is bad, i can't image (gives errors) sectors 10,000,000 to 15,000,000. Therefore in my destination between 10,000,000 and 15,000,000 is zero filled, but all the rest of the disk imaged fine. - I stop (or rather suspend) the current imaging session, and do a HSA swap. - I resume (rather stupid example, but to clarify a doubt) now with the new HSA the previous bad sectors are fine, so I fill them with data, but this new HSA has a bad head or other crap, and reads errors from 5,000,000 to 9,999,999. Does that mean my previously well read sectors in this area are zero filled because they read with errors ON THIS PASS? Sorry if it's a stupid or tricky question, but 30% of my tricky imaging sessions leave me with this doubt. Thanks |
|
| Author: | Russwinters [ June 25th, 2010, 11:49 ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Deepspar V Atola Imager - actual comparison |
If you are resuming the same imaging session, if those sectors where already imaged successfully then it should not touch those sectors again; so you should be just fine. Remember, Atola keeps track of what sectors that it has already imaged. Regards, |
|
| Author: | mediaman [ June 25th, 2010, 12:02 ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Deepspar V Atola Imager - actual comparison |
Russwinters wrote: If you are resuming the same imaging session, if those sectors where already imaged successfully then it should not touch those sectors again; so you should be just fine. Remember, Atola keeps track of what sectors that it has already imaged. Regards, thanks Russ. I was hoping for that answer. It sounds right. I may have to actually do a test to see if it so. BTW a recent terrible imaging job (15% of disk with errors) was a complete success re-reading those sectores with no ECC. On finishing from 10,000 errors on the 4th pass I ended up with a just couple of hundred on the last. I estimate to have recovered all files, out of 100 or so I check only one bad one. Very happy. Client will be too, he had taken it to another "recommended repair shop" they could not recover anything, opened it, in process filled it with the roughest dust you have ever seen, and sent it back "dead"..... I should have taken pictures... |
|
| Author: | Russwinters [ June 25th, 2010, 12:49 ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Deepspar V Atola Imager - actual comparison |
Great to hear! I am very pleased with all of the work Dmitry and his team are doing, they have really improved the imaging functionality a lot in the past 6 months, and there is more still to come this summer! |
|
| Author: | lcoughey [ June 27th, 2010, 20:20 ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Deepspar V Atola Imager - actual comparison |
I just made a few adjustments to my review. 1. Added the note that DeepSpar includes worldwide shipping in their price 2. Added a line to show cost for updates. DeepSpar imager updates have been and will continue to be free 3. Added a line to show that with the DeepSpar Forensic Edition, one can image USB devices...these actually include anything connected via USB from camera card readers to DVD ROMs. I haven't explored how much functionality works via the USB, but it certainly can be helpful, as I discovered this past Friday |
|
| Author: | neuron [ July 1st, 2010, 17:19 ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Deepspar V Atola Imager - actual comparison |
lcoughey wrote: Okay, I've finished my review. I plan to test and play with a few more things, so don't be surprised if there are some tweaks over time. http://www.recoveryforce.com/articles/5 ... omparisons If you notice any mistakes, please let me know and I will verify and make the necessary corrections. If someone wants to ... Luke Hi, great comp. But some Q. 1- in the article is GNU ddrescue, in firsts msg dd_rescue? They are different. 2 - "Reverse clone" - in "GNU ddrescue Manual" "3) Read backwards one sector at a time the non-trimmed blocks..." and in README : "...run it in reverse mode, etc." 3 - I´m using this (ddrescue) for true copys... if we copy in W$ndows ... we start putting something in the disks... I don't think is good idea to compile in W$. We use in MacOSX and Unix - OpenBSD, NetBSD and FreeBSD. Regards, Neuron |
|
| Author: | lcoughey [ July 2nd, 2010, 10:36 ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Deepspar V Atola Imager - actual comparison |
neuron wrote: Hi, great comp. But some Q. 1- in the article is GNU ddrescue, in firsts msg dd_rescue? They are different. I'm not sure where you see my referencing dd_rescue. As the article states, I'm referring to GNU ddrescue. neuron wrote: 2 - "Reverse clone" - in "GNU ddrescue Manual" "3) Read backwards one sector at a time the non-trimmed blocks..." and in README : "...run it in reverse mode, etc." I was thinking more in lines of being able to force a reverse clone. That is, tell the program to start at sector 'X' and read in reverse. But, you are correct in that it technically does run in reverse. I've made the necessary adjustment. neuron wrote: 3 - I´m using this (ddrescue) for true copys... if we copy in W$ndows ... we start putting something in the disks... I don't think is good idea to compile in W$. We use in MacOSX and Unix - OpenBSD, NetBSD and FreeBSD. I agree that Windows is not the best environment to use for drive duplication. However, with the help of cygwin, it can be done; thus, why I documented it so. |
|
| Author: | neuron [ July 2nd, 2010, 19:29 ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Deepspar V Atola Imager - actual comparison |
lcoughey wrote: neuron wrote: Hi, great comp. But some Q. 1- in the article is GNU ddrescue, in firsts msg dd_rescue? They are different. I'm not sure where you see my referencing dd_rescue. As the article states, I'm referring to GNU ddrescue. Hi, In "Posted: March 17th, 2010, 10:16 ... I've landed my hands on an Atola Imager. I'm currently working on a comparison chart between DeepSpar Disk Imager, Atola Imager (Ethernet) and DD_Rescue. ..." - Please add all BSD: OpenBSD, NetBSD and FreeBSD. to O.S. - "Checksum Calculations" the final image? Yes, we have the file, (From the "man cksum, sum") " ... algorithms include cksum, md4, md5, rmd160, sha1, sha256, sha384, sha512, sum, and sysvsum ... " - "E-Mail Notification" In a Shell script: ....... If ddrescue ..... mail to ..... It's in OS, not in ddrescue. Best Regards, Neuron |
|
| Author: | lcoughey [ July 5th, 2010, 10:29 ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Deepspar V Atola Imager - actual comparison |
neuron wrote: - Please add all BSD: OpenBSD, NetBSD and FreeBSD. to O.S. I can add BSD to the list. Quote: - "Checksum Calculations" the final image? Yes, we have the file, (From the "man cksum, sum") " ... algorithms include cksum, md4, md5, rmd160, sha1, sha256, sha384, sha512, sum, and sysvsum ... " - "E-Mail Notification" In a Shell script: ....... If ddrescue ..... mail to ..... It's in OS, not in ddrescue. As you state, those features are not a functionality of ddrescue, rather the OS. If you want to create your own distribution that includes these extra features, I'd be more than happy to test it out and add it to the review. |
|
| Author: | neuron [ July 7th, 2010, 14:53 ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Deepspar V Atola Imager - actual comparison |
Quote: As you state, those features are not a functionality of ddrescue, rather the OS. If you want to create your own distribution that includes these extra features, I'd be more than happy to test it out and add it to the review. Great idea, Let's start the hard work  Thank you, Neuron |
|
| Author: | utdr [ October 6th, 2010, 0:25 ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Deepspar V Atola Imager - actual comparison |
many of the missing features of ddrescue can be accomplished with hdparm and simple scripting. Does anyone know how to get the Linux kernel to ignore ecc? |
|
| Author: | lcoughey [ December 1st, 2010, 16:45 ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Deepspar V Atola Imager - actual comparison |
With the latest release of DDI 3.11 with a networking component upgrade, I plan to update my review in the next couple of weeks. If anyone wants to send me an updated Atola Imager, I'll be sure to update my review of it, too. |
|
| Author: | mediaman [ December 1st, 2010, 16:57 ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Deepspar V Atola Imager - actual comparison |
Atola now has head by head imaging for Seagate and WD. The imaging control menu is now greatly improved and it is possible to jump to anywhere on the disk during the imaging session just by clicking on the disk map. I have not personally tried the head by head imaging yet. |
|
| Author: | lcoughey [ December 1st, 2010, 16:59 ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Deepspar V Atola Imager - actual comparison |
Because I want to be sure my review is accurate as possible, I'd prefer not to change it without hands on experience seeing the features at work. |
|
| Author: | torryton [ November 9th, 2011, 8:34 ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Deepspar V Atola Imager - actual comparison |
Thanks for the informative and usefull answer! What are the differences between Atola Imager and Atola Insight? Why is the 5000$ difference? |
|
| Author: | falther [ November 10th, 2011, 3:35 ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Deepspar V Atola Imager - actual comparison |
Have a look to this link / comparison sheet : http://www.computerdoktor.at/Atola_comparison.pdf Besides this information, I work day by day with Atola tools close to 24/7 - and for those cases where I want to have a bit more than just cloning a drive - there is no way around Atola Insight. This tool has paid itself rapidly several times - especially in those cases where customers can see the bad status of their hdd minutes after they braught their defect system. +++ |
|
| Page 4 of 4 | All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|