Re: Incompetent? was Re: Using Linux to Recover bad NTFS drive.
From: Jim (james_at_the-computer-shop.co.uk)
Date: Fri, 20 May 2005 07:54:26 GMT
> On Fri, 20 May 2005 02:17:09 +0200, Mike Cox wrote:
>>Tony Lawrence <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote in news:A_KdnY_riYhxvxDfRVn-
>>>Mike Cox wrote:
>>>>How would one read the data on a raw device? mount as ntfs? Is it
>>>>possible to non-destructively copy the ntfs drive to linux and then
>>>>manipulate it in linux so I wouldn't have to touch the defective drive
bloody hell - you could do this in Windows... it's called Partition
Magic. You could even use DiscWizard, which runs under DR-DOS. Both have
the ability to nondestructively clone a partition or even an entire
drive. Back in Windows or BartPE you run SectorSpy to dump the raw
sector data into text file on a new (much larger) drive for forensic
analysis/recovery. Job done.
How hard does life have to be for you?
>>>Assuming sufficient space, you could just dd the device to a file, and
>>>then do whatever you like with that, including mounting the file using
>>>the loopback device.
>>>But is this the same Mike Cox who recently posted "Solaris 10 success
>>>story" and said "Unfortunately, I had to inform the client that their
>>>sys Admins were incompetent" ?
>>Well, they knew less than I. They were incompentent.
That's just plain arrogant. I wouldn't hire you.
>>>How would someone who doesn't know how to dd a raw device have the
>>>chutzpah to call anyone incompetent? Just curious.. must not be the
>>Well this is different. This is _my_ data. I don't care if the client
>>losses data, after all they should've had backups!
> Remind me to never hire you. You're a menace.
I consult - my first priority is the client's data! FCOL, that's the
entire point of what I do, why I charge £45/hour for my time, and why
the operation costs £1,000/GB source. Because a: people value their data
that much they're willing to pay that for sector recovery if there's
even a chance that they'll get their data back, even if it is in a text
file they need 64GB of RAM to open, and b: my success rate for sector
recovery (80%) speaks for itself.
>>Most of the data the
>>client can recreate. I had things like pics of my vacations, etc. Things
>>that cannot be replaced.
Hmmm, sure. A year's accounts for a large corp. You fancy typing all
that back in from boxed archives? That's often the only backup available.
>>As for dd, I've never had a bad drive in my life before. I had no need
>>to learn something like dd. After all, I've only been a Unix consultant
>>for 6 months. Before that I was an MCSE, but I've found specializing in
>>Unix/Solars/Linux makes me more money.
oh, no, he said the "M" word.
And yet you don't value the client's data??
Sorry, I just don't get you.
> Not only are you a menace, you're an ignorant menace! dd is something
> every linux sysadmin should know about.
>>Let me give you a little consulting tip. The trick to being a rich
>>successful consultant is to _always_ *seem* smarter than the client's
>>employees. It is necessary to label them incompetent! That way I get
>>full authority to work my magic on their systems. For example, of course
>>I knew the Hyperthreading flaw wasn't an issue on x86-64 opteron. But I
>>wanted Solaris on the system so I fudged it a bit.
don't *seem* smarter, *know* your own limitations, *be* smart and *tell
your client * if something (like as simple as being able to save his
data) is beyond your ability. That way when his data goes bye bye, he is
less likely to sue you for wilful negligence, if you've made him aware
that the operation you are about to carry out can/will destroy what data
he had, or there's a chance that you won't be able to recover anything.
My clients have always been made aware of the inherent risks, including
the success rate in hard numbers, yet have always been happy to let me
try. Not a single one of my failures have so far seen fit to sue.
> That's not "fudging". That's called "lying".
> I've dealt with "consultants" like you before. They don't last long in my
> shop. (They last a long as it takes for them to get in the door, look at
> my network and _think_ they know what they are doing, then leave the
> building with my foot up their ass!)
> The less of linux
>>then there is more space for MS. Divide and conquor.
> "Moving" a customer to Solaris from Linux is _not_ a win for Microsoft. I
> hope they're not paying you for this "service".
>>On a side note, when I need help, look how much brown nosing of linux
>>advocates I have done. You guys are smart. I'll give you that. If I
>>get my data back following your advice, I'll call you guys Smarter then
>>Bill G. I'll call you better than Turing. You are gods and geniuses if
>>I get my drive to work again. LINUX RULES if it brings back my dead NTFS
We're specialists in our own fields. Mine is performing miracles,
because I follow unorthodox procedures - my own procedures - which
usually gets things done faster, better and stronger than established ones.
[merges with the shadows]
-- Cheers, Jim -begin sig- Opinions expressed in this message may or may not be representative of the opinions of its author. You decide. Web: http://www.dotware.co.uk http://www.dotware-entertainment.co.uk Portable: P4m 2.0, 1GB, 40GB, MX440/15" XGA@1600x1200, Wi-Fi, GPRS, DVD/CDRW, XPSP2/Knoppix Powerbook G3/400, 392MB, 20GB, Rage 128/15"@1024x768, Wi-Fi, DVD, Mac OS X 10.4 "Tiger" Dev. Build Desktop: AMD64 email@example.comGHz, 512MB, 80GB, FX5700LE/32" WXGA@2048x768, DVD+-RW, XPSP1/Debian FileServer: Athlon XP 2400+, 256MB, 2.72TB, Blind, MuLinux More but I'm not tellin' ya, there's a pool forming at your feet. -end sig-