Jump to content


Bug Kinda..


5 replies to this topic

#1 OFFLINE   TheFiresInTheSky

    aka "neighberaaron"

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,738 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:somewhere in the glove
  • Interests:computers, myspace, website building, skating, ITG, DDR, summers, hanging out at the mall.

Posted 16 January 2007 - 11:12 PM

When I opened it, I decided to plug my flash drive in and try it.
It didn't auto-find it.
I had to close the program and re-open it.

Also, why show the unrecoverable files?
After all, they are...unrecoverable.

-aaron ;)

#2 OFFLINE   TwistedMetal

    Forum Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 1,537 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Glendale, AZ
  • Interests:CCleaner, Computers, and Movies

Posted 16 January 2007 - 11:25 PM

Really, that's not a bug. It's due to the way it's programmed. It will always probably be like that. I suggested to add an Option in Options to filter out Unrecoverable files already. But, that was a few days ago too. <_<
Your Friendly Neighborhood Piriform Forum Moderator
Quick Links: Forum Rules

#3 OFFLINE   fireryone

    Lets Get Dangerous

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,626 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:QLD,Australia
  • Interests:PC, LOTRO

Posted 17 January 2007 - 02:52 AM

View PostTheFiresInTheSky, on Jan 17 2007, 09:12 AM, said:

...

Also, why show the unrecoverable files?
After all, they are...unrecoverable.

-aaron ;)

Well I just tryed to recover 2 text files listed a unrecoverable with 36/37Kb each.

and they seemed to be recovered though they werent files i had ever seen before they where nero related but it still had plenty of readable text.
fireryone



There are 10 types of people in this world.
Those who understand binary, and those who don't.

#4 OFFLINE   TheFiresInTheSky

    aka "neighberaaron"

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,738 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:somewhere in the glove
  • Interests:computers, myspace, website building, skating, ITG, DDR, summers, hanging out at the mall.

Posted 17 January 2007 - 03:08 AM

maybe a name like "partially unrecoverable" then?

#5 OFFLINE   fireryone

    Lets Get Dangerous

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,626 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:QLD,Australia
  • Interests:PC, LOTRO

Posted 17 January 2007 - 05:05 AM

View PostTheFiresInTheSky, on Jan 17 2007, 01:08 PM, said:

maybe a name like "partially unrecoverable" then?
yea 0Kb files should be marked unrecoverable
and anything larger but likley unrecoverable should be something like your "partially unrecoverable" idea.

I still agree filtering them out via check box would be handy.
having the option to try to restore them is also good even if only partially, it may just be the part you needed.
eg. document/text files
fireryone



There are 10 types of people in this world.
Those who understand binary, and those who don't.

#6 OFFLINE   spy1

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 17 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Charlotte, NC

Posted 23 January 2007 - 03:56 AM

View PostTheFiresInTheSky, on Jan 16 2007, 06:12 PM, said:

Also, why show the unrecoverable files?
After all, they are...unrecoverable.

-aaron ;)

I like it the way it is because it lets' me know that Eraser - and all my "junk file" programs that feed Eraser - are working properly.

The Recuva program works extremely well here just the way it is - and it's blindingly fast compared to either of the other two programs I've previously used (RecoverMyFiles and FileRecover).

The only real question I have is why would the "Comments" section say "No overwritten clusters detected" ? Trust me, everything that was deleted got over-written. Am I just mis-understanding the wording?

At any rate - great job! Pete

Attached Files