How to rescue Deleted Partitions

[DesDownunder]

I recently had to restore a deleted partition on my hard drive.

I found a program called, Partition Find and Mount saved the day.

Highly recommended

For the full story of my disaster and rescue see the entry in my blog.

[The Pecman]

I don't see the point for partitioning any more. I think all modern operating systems (including XP, Vista, Windows 7, and recent flavors of Mac OSX) access big hard drives with no problem.

I am a proponent of having one boot hard drive, on which you keep the operating system and all applications, and then use a separate drive for all documents and related files. To me, this makes backups that much easier, plus you can always just grab the data drive and use it on another computer if you want to.

I also find that most computers run faster if you keep the data files on a separate drive. That way, you're not bogging down performance due to drive access issues. This is a huge problem with video editing programs, or memory hogs like Photoshop.

[DesDownunder]

I don't see the point for partitioning any more. I think all modern operating systems (including XP, Vista, Windows 7, and recent flavors of Mac OSX) access big hard drives with no problem.

I am a proponent of having one boot hard drive, on which you keep the operating system and all applications, and then use a separate drive for all documents and related files. To me, this makes backups that much easier, plus you can always just grab the data drive and use it on another computer if you want to.

I also find that most computers run faster if you keep the data files on a separate drive. That way, you're not bogging down performance due to drive access issues. This is a huge problem with video editing programs, or memory hogs like Photoshop.

Some people just don't have the funds for two hard drives, also, I prefer to keep the pagefile (swapfile) on a separate drive just for itself. I also like the applications (where possible) to be in their own logical drive. This makes it a lot easier when setting up a new computer-for me anyway. In all this the defragment time alone is considerably reduced as it is mainly the OS drive that needs it.

My experience would always advise at least two partitions for safety, but I like your idea for having separate hard discs for data and OS where this is affordable for the individual.

My computer has removable slots for all the hard drives and this allows me to change the hard drives as needed. They are all partitioned the same for interchangeability. I think it depends on how you work and the type of work you do.

As far as this is concerned I hate the way Windows tries to dictate not only how I work, but where I should keep the files I want to access. Again, for me the Mac is worse, but I am not arguing over this as I have long since recognised this is akin to offending people's religion.

I certainly agree video editing needs as much space and speed as it can get.

[Drewbie]

I keep my applications on one drive and some other files but most of my itunes, flv/youtube files and other files are on my other drive.

[The Pecman]

Some people just don't have the funds for two hard drives...

Des, give me a mailing address and I'll ship you a slightly-used 250GB IDE drive for free. This is more than big enough for a boot drive and application drive. (The only trick here is that I know in some OS's, if you want to do a master/slave thing with the drives, it's better to use the exact same manufacturer, model, and size.)

In all this the defragment time alone is considerably reduced as it is mainly the OS drive that needs it.

Defragging isn't needed nearly as much in modern operating systems any more. Apple specifically says it's redundant now, because basically OSX does that in the background automatically. I think the reality is that with fast drives, fragmented files don't slow down the OS anymore. I agree, it did 10 years ago, but not nearly as much today.

From the Wikipedia entry on Fragmentation:

Improvements in modern hard drives such as RAM cache, faster platter rotation speed, and greater data density reduce the negative impact of fragmentation on system performance to some degree, though increases in commonly used data quantities offset those benefits. However, modern systems profit enormously from the huge disk capacities currently available, since partially filled disks fragment much less than full disks.

What my partner and I do to avoid defragmentation is, every so often, we'll just copy all the files from the main drive to a backup drive, then swap them out. Just the act of copying files automatically defrags the new drive. But I haven't noticed a whit of change in performance, not even when doing video editing. (In fact, Avid specifically warns video editors not to defrag, but I'm not exactly sure on their reasoning.)

As far as this is concerned I hate the way Windows tries to dictate not only how I work, but where I should keep the files I want to access. Again, for me the Mac is worse, but I am not arguing over this as I have long since recognised this is akin to offending people's religion.

Naaa, no offense taken. Mac OSX drives me crazy all the time. Don't forget: I'm forced to use XP, Win2000, Linux, DOS, and OSX all the time as part of my day job. I like to say I hate all operating systems equally; it's just that OSX annoys me a little less. There are good and bad aspects of them.

And again, I think Windows 7 is terrific. No question, Microsoft got it right with that one. I'm looking forward to installing 7 on my little Asus netbook, which is one of my favorite computers. Ain't nothing like it available from Apple. (Yet!)

[DesDownunder]

Des, give me a mailing address and I'll ship you a slightly-used 250GB IDE drive for free. This is more than big enough for a boot drive and application drive. (The only trick here is that I know in some OS's, if you want to do a master/slave thing with the drives, it's better to use the exact same manufacturer, model, and size.)

Me and my big mouth. I was really just making an observation about not everyone being able to afford more than one drive.

I do have a couple of spare drives, but I confess to not having used them as you suggest, Pecman.

I have corrected that now and have them both installed, though I have I done that in a way that suits my idiosyncrasies.

I really appreciate your very kind and generous offer.

Defragging isn't needed nearly as much in modern operating systems any more. Apple specifically says it's redundant now, because basically OSX does that in the background automatically. I think the reality is that with fast drives, fragmented files don't slow down the OS anymore. I agree, it did 10 years ago, but not nearly as much today.

From the Wikipedia entry on Fragmentation:

Improvements in modern hard drives such as RAM cache, faster platter rotation speed, and greater data density reduce the negative impact of fragmentation on system performance to some degree, though increases in commonly used data quantities offset those benefits. However, modern systems profit enormously from the huge disk capacities currently available, since partially filled disks fragment much less than full disks.

What my partner and I do to avoid defragmentation is, every so often, we'll just copy all the files from the main drive to a backup drive, then swap them out. Just the act of copying files automatically defrags the new drive. But I haven't noticed a whit of change in performance, not even when doing video editing. (In fact, Avid specifically warns video editors not to defrag, but I'm not exactly sure on their reasoning.)

I agree, I have done that swapping out and back myself. However I do find that the system does respond better for me if I keep the OS drive defragmented. It is only a small improvement and nothing like it was under early versions of Windows and once a month is more than it needs. Also with the pagefile in its own logical drive (or set to a fixed size) it never gets spread around and mixed in with the other files. I do find this difference significant, but I admit others do not.

Naaa, no offense taken. Mac OSX drives me crazy all the time. Don't forget: I'm forced to use XP, Win2000, Linux, DOS, and OSX all the time as part of my day job. I like to say I hate all operating systems equally; it's just that OSX annoys me a little less. There are good and bad aspects of them.

And again, I think Windows 7 is terrific. No question, Microsoft got it right with that one. I'm looking forward to installing 7 on my little Asus netbook, which is one of my favorite computers. Ain't nothing like it available from Apple. (Yet!)

Well, my Vista sits in its own box never to see the inside of my computer. I detest it with a vengeance. I almost dislike the latest MS office with its accursed ribbon as much. I am pleased to hear that Windows 7 is much improved.

Also I prefer to to stay with the devil I know rather than waste whatever time I have left in trying to learn another operating system.

Let me try to explain something about my current attitude to my computer use. At the moment my computer is a 4-core Intel 6700 with 4 gig RAM. It has a Creative X-Fi Pro card and outboard rig. It was the best I could afford at the time of purchase.

This purchase represents something of a final fling for me as I do not expect to ever have the funds to replace it any time soon.

It has the benefit of doing everything I want to do at the present time, and given my age and some might say, senility, I think it will probably outlast me, not that I am threatened with end of life experiences in the near future as far as I know.

On the otherhand there is sufficient geek in me to want the latest and greatest, but if I can do what I want I won't be too concerned unless they actually manage to make a computer that can perform acts of physical gratification without me have to type instructions.

If I am lucky and still have a functioning brain in 5-10 years, then just maybe I will feel like attacking a new learning curve, but only after I have written a few more stories, essays, and found yet more meanings of life.

Thanks again Pec.

Horrified addtional comment: My computer guru friend who is responsible for getting me started in computing and Windows in particular just told me he has switched to Mac. Oh well he is 10 years younger than me, so perhaps he has the time to play with it.

[The Pecman]

I almost dislike the latest MS office with its accursed ribbon as much. I am pleased to hear that Windows 7 is much improved. Also I prefer to to stay with the devil I know rather than waste whatever time I have left in trying to learn another operating system.

I agree with you to a point. I also dislike the new Office interface design, and I do everything I can to customize it more-or-less back the way it used to be. Old habits die hard. The new OS isn't that bad, but I have to turn a lot of stuff off. But the Vista Aero design is very well-done. And as for me, I never mind learning something new. To me, that's just evolution. Gotta keep on, keepin' on.

Let me try to explain something about my current attitude to my computer use. At the moment my computer is a 4-core Intel 6700 with 4 gig RAM. It has a Creative X-Fi Pro card and outboard rig. It was the best I could afford at the time of purchase.

That's a fantastic computer. I don't think we own anything that fast here in the house, though my partner was kind enough to cram 9GB of RAM in my current Mac, because I kept running out of RAM for certain projects. This is just a 2x dual-core 2.66 machine, not the latest and greatest by any means.

On the other hand there is sufficient geek in me to want the latest and greatest, but if I can do what I want I won't be too concerned unless they actually manage to make a computer that can perform acts of physical gratification without me have to type instructions.

If they come out with that for Windows, I'll dump the Mac!

Horrified addtional comment: My computer guru friend who is responsible for getting me started in computing and Windows in particular just told me he has switched to Mac. Oh well he is 10 years younger than me, so perhaps he has the time to play with it.

Yeah, it's kinda like Invasion of the Body Snatchers -- or more like, Invasion of the Windows Snatchers. You go to sleep, a satisfied, comfortable Windows person, and you wake up, now you're acting strangely, and using a Mac.

There are definitely cult-like aspects of getting enmeshed in Macdom, but I try to resist as much of that as I can and stay objective. There's a lot of stuff that still sucks about the Mac, and a few things about Windows that are superior (even such simple things as adjusting the size of window interface boxes). To me, it's just another way of getting something done. It doesn't have to be a religion, and I try to keep an open mind.

Maybe you should spend some time with your geek/guru friend and have him demo the Mac for you, and show you specifically what made him want to change.