Do i need a Deepspar Imager if i have a PC-3000 + DE?

[zed]

Hi.

I have a PC-3000 UDMA and use it with Data Extractor for cloning disks or reading disks with bad sectors.

I am considering buying a Deepspar imager to see it can help with the disks with failing heads or lots of bad sectors. Does anybody have both of these? If so - is the Deepspar a waste of money if the results/capabilies are similar?

I am referring to the disk cloning capacilities of disks with serious read/write problems (e.g hitachi 2.5" disks that you can hear the heads re-trying to read over and over again).

I look forward to hearing from anybody who actually owns both.

Thanks,
Zed

[dobrevjetser]

Hi Zed,

Both systems are very different.
I use Udma to repair/diagnose the diks, then image with deepspar, and then extract data with DE or a software complex.
Deepspar is very good to image drives with bad sectors, and is very fast.
You can use only two instances of DE to clone disks, but you can use a lot more instances of DE to retrieve data from disks that are allready cloned (deespar makes a udma map of bad sectors, so DE knows which files gives problems).
That way, it frees up the two udma channels for repair/diagnose.

For me, it is absolutely worth its money.

Dobre

[zed]

Thanks - i'm glad to hear that. Anybody else have both and have a different view?

[toasta]

Nope, thats pretty much right on. Although i do use DE to image some drives, they are both worth the money.

[zed]

Is there any reason to use PC-3000 UDMA Data Extractor to Image/clone a disk with bad sectors instead of Deepspar? (Any one handle drive errors better?)

[dobrevjetser]

I would say drive errors are handled better with deepspar, but with DE, you can use the MFT to just clone the sectors that contain data, hence speeding up the cloning significantly and also avoiding excessive use of (sometimes damaged) heads. Offcourse sometimes cloning the whole drive in a continuous mode can be more head saving than letting the head swap from InnerDiameter to OD all the time.

Dobre

[lcoughey]

I depend on both and tend to use DE when DDI is not available, when I'm just targeting specific files or dealing with a Samsung drive that may have head issues and requires a head map.

If it is a choice between one or the other, get DDI first. It will pay for itself very quickly and then you can speed up the saving process for PC3000 with DE.