5 May
2010
5 May
'10
6:30 p.m.
From: thomas.gardner at sbcglobal.net
Message: 3
Date: Tue, 4 May 2010 16:52:54 -0700
From: dwight elvey <dkelvey at hotmail.com>
Subject: RE: Drive recovery
To: "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts"
<cctalk at classiccmp.org>
Message-ID: <SNT129-W423C1F47E5486E7A1E8EFFA3F30 at phx.gbl>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
---snip---
Hi
If I was running a drive recovery business, every drive that came in
would be opened first in a clean room before powering on. If there
was a failure of one of the disk, shipping could have distributed bits
to unaffected surfaces.
I don't think I could run it any different than that. I'd have to charge
for that as well.
Dwight
Since most drive failures are not head disk interferences much less a crash,
the proposed process would unnecessarily both add cost and increase the risk
of head disk interference without, IMO, significantly changing the data
recovery probability.