Alan_B

Your chances are reduced by every incorrect attempt that you may have made or are making or will make. Your photos have existed on both C:\ and also your external drive, therefore there are TWO different drives from which you could possibly recover your photos. Dennis has correctly explained that when Windows is running it will naturally over-write your deleted photos that were present on C:\. There is always hope - but you seem to have exhausted that. If you recovered 46,000 pictures from a drive and restored them to the same drive, it is guaranteed that you are using up the free-space in which the photos were possibly lurking, and you are causing irreversible destruction and loss. If you recovered 46,000 pictures from drive C:\ and restored them to a different partition / drive / device then you followed what is NORMALLY good practice, BUT in this particular case if you were restoring to the external drive which has NOW become corrupt, then you could have been using up free-space on that drive and IF the photos were lost then they would have been in that free space and at risk of being over-written. I strongly suggest that you make NO attempts at recovery TO that external drive, and since you originally removed your photos from C:\ due to lack of space, I advise you to buy / borrow an alternative external drive as the destination for ALL attempts at recovery.

I have just visited the Palemoon forum, and now remember it is Plugins, not Extensions, that have restricted availability on 64 bit sysytems. This is a useful topic "Should I choose Pale Moon 32-bit or 64-bit?" http://forum.palemoon.org/viewtopic.php?f=24&t=2516

That should never be done unless you will accept an extremely high risk that all files will be over-written before they can be saved. Many data recovery programs absolutely prevent restoring to the same drive to protect novices. If you want to see your files again you must get / buy an external drive that is large enough to hold all you wish to recover. Please note that every minute you are running :- Running Windows it is gradually over-writing the files you have lost on C:\ Using a browser it is less slowly over-writing any files you lost on the browser partition.

32 bit Portable Palemoon on 64 bit Windows 7 opens www.icloud.com and asks me to sign in. I have no apple ID or password so I do not bother. I believe Microsoft compilers for 64 bit code do NOT work as well as they do for 32 bit code. Perhaps for the same reason most extensions Plugins that work on 32 bit Firefox are also available and work on 32 bit versions of Palemoon, but are either not available or less capable on 64 bit browsers. For these reasons I have no wish to use 64 bit Palemoon, and only use the 32 bit version. I suggest you try 32 bit Portable Palemoon (avoiding conflict with your installed version), or get advise at their forum http://forum.palemoon.org/

I am totally disagreeing with the need for a 32 GB or 64 GB Flash drive as previously suggested by Derek, and feared that LuLu was going down that path with a "larger Jump Drive". I did have in mind an external drive such as your suggestion of WD My Passport Essential 500 GB Midnight Black Portable Hard Drive (USB 3.0/2.0). For me the simple and reliable solution is a small Flash Drive to boot into Macrium WinPE Rescue with image backups on the external drive. Macrium will cause no problem if the external drive also holds "native Windows Image files", but since I do not trust the behavior of Windows I would be inclined to segregate the Windows images in a separate partition on that external drive.

Factually incorrect. I have never seen a "2-digit-major"."4-digit -minor" version string in which the minor consisted of either 4 identical digits, or 2 pairs of digits. If you scrutinize the past versions it should become self evident that the last 4 digits are a progressive sequence, probably snapshots of the total quantity of code changes since the beginning. e.g. http://www.filehippo.com/download_ccleaner/history That suggests that version 4.02 has advanced from 4.01 by 23 off enhancements/fixes and 4.10 needed 99 fixes because the developers were especially busy - probably struggling to keep up with the madness of Chrome The 4 trailing digits may be VERY useful on occassions. e.g. A little while ago there was a quickly encountered bug in a newly released version, and I seem to remember that it was rapidly fixed after the bug was repeated, and the new version had the SAME major suffix of 2 digits, but an increased 4 digit minor suffix. I forget which version had the error, BUT If you have not updated frequently and are using, for example 4.07.4365, that was superseded by 4.07.4369, and 4.07.4365 may be doing you harm - you either need to update OR revert to an earlier version.

I totally and fundamentally disagree. You only need a SMALL Flash drive, or even a CD, for Macrium Boot Recovery to do its magic. A small flash drive has random read access, and your Recovery software will load much faster than from a sequential access CD. You can use EITHER a large Flash Drive OR a Hard Drive (preferably external) OR a stack of DVD's to hold the image. In my experience :- an external Hard drive does NOT need random access for a Macrium image backup and has the fastest read transfer rate; A Flash drive is stupendously slower when you WRITE a backup image, and you SHOULD be making images much more frequently than having to restore and recover from system and your own errors; I have NO experience of using a stack of DVD's - and intend to avoid such agony.

With luck Lazesoft may solve your problem If you booted your PC with an Installation Disk then either NO drive letters are shown, OR the WRONG letters are shown, and it is easy to format the wrong drive. That should never happen to me because I assign System Volume Names with a hint, e.g. C_System_C, and even a Linux Boot CD will show that identity. If you formatted with the Windows 8.1 Installation Disk it PROBABLY recognized your drive as being "Advanced Format", and it MIGHT have automatically "done you a favour" by aligning the partition because that greatly improves A.F. performance. If W.D. created your A.F. drive drive aligned to W.D. standards, and then Microsoft re-aligned to M.S. standards, then when you read the "RAW DATA" from the M.S. aligned partition you may be reading from the last half of one W.D. sector and the first half of another sector. It might be worth asking W.D. for advice Alan

Windows has 3 different ways to format a drive. You may have used a format tool intended for SSD, which might have corrupted your HDD. Your data has little chance of recovery unless you used Windows Explorer "Quick Format", and that also would fail if a glitch in the GUI or your handling of the mouse caused the "Quick Format" box to be unchecked as you were launching the format action. Your data was recorded on an Advanced Format HDD with 4096 byte sectors, and perhaps your format operation failed to honor that and chose to write "sector identities" at 512 byte intervals, in which case I doubt that even the CIA could recover your data. Someone MAY be able to tell you how to determine whether your drive is now "Normal Format" instead of "Advanced Format" It is just possible that the data recovery solutions that have failed you may have dealt with your drive as "Normal Format" instead of "Advanced Format". You may just possibly benefit from this freeware :- Lazesoft Recovery Suite 3.5 Home Edition (Free) http://www.lazesoft.com/download.html. It redirects to CNET, but so long as you are given 25.5 MB you have got the real thing and not one of the notorious CNET download managers. Softpedia was always my first choice for a download, but today they have numerous prominent download buttons for "other stuff". If Lazesoft also fails it is worth emailing their support. Their product was for me much better than commercial software costing $69, and when I complained of the "cosmetic defect" that the date/time stamps were "today's date" instead of the original time stamps, they fixed the code and sent me a perfect solution within a few days.

If you want advice to your specific problem then you need your own topic. You both have data loss, but the reasons and any possible solutions are drastically different.

Before there was Windows there was Microsoft DOS which had a "Free Space Chain" (F.S.C.) The F.S.C. started with a list of all sector clusters from the fast end to the slow end of the disk. As a file was written it would be allocated the first entry of the F.S.C. As a file was deleted its sector cluster was would be appended the the end of the F.S.C., and would NOT be reused for new files until all the preceding entries of the F.S.C. had been used up. Those were the good old days when you had plenty of time to recognize loss and could UN-delete. Windows has a preference for re-using sectors nearest the fast end of the disk regardless of how recently they were deleted. Windows and Internet browsers of all sorts are busy writing and deleting every second of the day. It is dangerous to hold your photos, archives, and other precious files on partition C:\, and also dangerous on any partition with browser caches or relocated Windows things such as %TEMP% and Pagefile.sys

@vakmar You were surprised to see :- That is no surprise to me - it is a consequence of that originates from Mozilla and is hard-coded to use those locations. http://portableapps.com/ will supply a "portablized" version of Firefox that can be held on any flash drive or any partition of any HDD, and this device will include an "image" of "C:\Documents and Settings\Int\Application Data\Mozilla". When you launch this "portablized" version of Firefox it will firstly restore the image to the location "C:\Documents and Settings\Int\Application Data\Mozilla", and then start running and using that profile at "C:\Documents and Settings\Int\Application Data\Mozilla". When you close Firefox then the code on the flash drive etc. will create a fresh image of the current state of "C:\Documents and Settings\Int\Application Data\Mozilla", and that image will be held on the flash drive etc. ready for you to resume browsing at the same point at which you closed, and finally it SHOULD eliminate what has been done at "C:\Documents and Settings\Int\Application Data\Mozilla" - but sometimes it fails - especially if there is a crash. If you are sure that you have no Mozilla products installed on C:\ then it should be safe to Close "Portable" Firefox rename "C:\Documents and Settings\Int\Application Data\Mozilla\" as "C:\Documents and Settings\Int\Application Data\######\" If you are able to then use "Portable" Firefox without any problems, and if you can close down at the end of the day and power up the next morning and all your applications still run properly, it should then be safe to delete that "######\" and everything that has based on it. An extremely brief search found two different variants of so called "Portable" Firefox version 27.1 From a site which I have used in the past and consider reliable http://portableapps.com/apps/internet/firefox_portable FirefoxPortable_27.0.1_English.paf 25.8 MB From a site that tells me little, and I only visited because I trust my security system and my Macrium Image backups http#//firefox-usb.com/ FirefoxPortable_27.0.1.zip 30.6 MB I changed the ':' to a '#' to protect against accidental visits. Where did you get your Portable version from ? I now use both the installed and really portable versions of PALEMOON, which is based on the same open source code as Firefox and runs the same extensions. When I right-click the desk-top short-cut the Portable Palemoon the second option on the context menu includes "open file location" and this takes me to the base of the browser package E:\Portable\PaleMoon\ which includes E:\Portable\PaleMoon\User\Palemoon\Profiles You should be able to locate your Firefox profiles by a similar technique.

I have no problems with this as a suggestion for optional enhanced safety, which might be better posted in the Suggestions topic http://forum.piriform.com/index.php?showforum=14 It might be better to change your request for TWO check-boxes :- Enhanced Safety - when CCleaner becomes out-of-date disables CCleaning for all recent Browsers/Applications which are LIKELY to suffer compatibility issues Super Enhanced safety - when CCleaner becomes out-of-date disables CCleaning for all recent Browsers/Applications due to potential risk of compatibility issues Alan

Please note that I developed and tested TRIM.BAT on 64 bit Windows 7 Ultimate + SP1 with normal installed applications. In principle I see no reason why it should malfunction under 32 bit Windows XP or when custom paths are used for portable browsers. I strongly suggest that you start afresh with a new folder holding a fresh unzip of CCleaner and WITHOUT either WinApp2.ini or TRIM.BAT. Once you have got CCleaner dealing with Firefox and cleaning correctly with the custom paths, then is the time to consider WinApp2.ini WITHOUT using TRIM.BAT. Once CCleaner.ini and WinApp2.ini are working correctly, ONLY THEN is it worth using TRIM.BAT. Please note the TRIM.BAT does NOTHING to enhance cleaning, its sole purpose is to reduce the long start-up delay as CCleaner.exe looks for the existence of a million and one applications for which WinApp2.ini has a "FIX". Alan

You are so wrong. I do NOT speak for CCleaner and have no control or special insight into the strategy of CCleaner. What I HAVE DONE is advise you of the strategy that I would adopt if I used an unstable browser / application such as Chrome. Firefox has forced frequent changes which often made some sites almost unreadable, and this forced me to switch to Palemoon which uses the same extensions and is based on the same open-source software, but is far more stable in its implementation. Subsequent to my move from Firefox I understand that Mozilla have been more erratic in their implementation, and I believe that some FireFox users have suffered similar grief with either too much or too little being targeted by CCleaner. I am sure that many Chrome users and Firefox users would be unhappy if CCleaner automatically disabled all cleaning of a browser when the browser was updated, and if CCleaner did disable then many users would be annoyed if a Ccleaner update :- Failed to automatically re-enable cleaning of the existing browser ; or DID automatically re-enable cleaning of the existing browser REGARDLESS of the users original decision to NOT clean certain aspects (e.g. I like to clean Palemoon caches, BUT PRESERVE Download History.) As an alternative to your specific suggestion, I suggest a more general approach :- For each specific unstable Browser/Application, a checkbox to disable cleaning if it has had a version update since CCleaner was updated. Regards Alan

If you wish to avoid all risks when you use an obsolete CCleaner on a new version of Chrome that habitually moves such things as user preferences, from locations which CCleaner respects into locations which were once Chromes garbage dump, then perhaps it is your responsibility to uncheck Chrome from CCleaner's settings.

Your memory is better than mine. I have just mounted a Macrium image of my old XP Laptop and see that it does indeed exist. BUT it contains exactly zero bytes, as does :- Autoexec.bat IO.sys MSDOS.SYS Registry cleaning will NOT choose to delete an obsolete "system" FILE, though its instructions to the O.S. might trigger unexpected consequences if Windows is already so badly corrupted that the only sane action is to re-install Windows. Removal of Config.sys is an unlikely cause for the loss of the Internet unless this is computer predates the Millennium bug http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_2000_problem

I do not remember seeing any CONFIG.SYS after I moved on from Windows 98. What is your version of Windows ? Perhaps CCleaner no longer supports it.

Some years ago I believe there may have been a conflict between by security/malware protection and the actions of a Partition Manager "tweak". The result was that my Laptop lost the partition tables - everything was lost. The ancient version 4.? Minitool Boot Rescue CD quickly located the partition boundaries and the only partition that proved troublesome was the "Acronis Secure Zone" which I had not used for years, so I gave up on that and restored the rest of the partitions. With partitions restored it failed to boot. I knew that Macrium would fix the problem but chose to gain alternative experiences. I plugged in the Minitool Boot Recovery CD again and used this to repair the MBR, and then WIndows was able to boot. After the excitement I realised that when I used Acronis it provided the "Acronis Secure Zone" as a rudimentary "Recovery" partition, and that the MBR and been twisted by Acronis to visit their zone during the boot process should the user be hitting a key, and otherwise it would then got to C:\ and start Windows. The MBR was trying to start-up via a partition that was no more..

Yes and No. When you launch Ccleaner.exe it SHOULD handover to Ccleaner64.exe which then cleans "Program Files" and "Program Files (x86)" etc. etc. etc. This handover is fully automatic and like all computer things- can never go wrong- can never go wrong- can never go wrong- can never go wrong- can never go wrong BSOD - BSOD - BSOD - BSOD - BSOD - BSOD - BSOD. If the handover misfires, or if you save disk space by removing Ccleaner64.exe, then the 32 bit CCleaner.exe wll NOT cleanup any 64 bit programs which should reside in "Program Files".

Personally I do not care which direction it spins in. I would however be rather peeved if effluent came up instead of going down.

Attach these to your monitor for a perfect solution for your problem http://regalcastors.com/ You are right, off-topic is super good

Regardless of how effective an over-write may be It may be possible that it was securely archived by NSA through a Windows Back-Door before it was deleted

A moment to KitKat celebrate - you beat Dennis to placing the first post

It ain't necessarily so. System requirements I am familar with are :- 1 gigabyte (GB) RAM (32-bit) or 2 GB RAM (64-bit) http://windows.microsoft.com/en-us/windows7/products/system-requirements The amount of RAM is double for 64 bits compared with 32 bits but the number of 64 bit words is about the same as the number of 32 bit data words. A 32 bit application can run on either a 32 bit system or a 64 bit system. It will use the same number of 64 bit words as the number of 32 bit data words, i.e. twice the number of GB on 64 bit compared to 32 bit hardware Memory requirements should either be expressed as a number of words, or as a number of GB qualified by whether used on 32 bit or 64 bit (or worse) hardware. Sorry to be pedantic (actually it is one of my pleasures ) Regards Alan