My expectation is that there is little difference in capability with either so long as TRIM has not occurred.
e.g. no difference under XP or Vista.
My expectation is that on a TRIM capable system, Windows will issue TRIM after a file is deleted,
probably immediately upon deletion before Windows forgets what it has to do
I further expect that Windows and therefore Recuva will be kept totally ignorant of when TRIM has occurred,
and therefore Recuva will not know when or if a relevant page of NAND cells has been erased.
A further complication is that even if a file used consecutive LBA file clusters the SSD might write them to different pages of NAND cells,
and a "staggered" TRIM might result in some sections of data being erased before others.
I also suspect that some SSD products may possibly choose to refrain from reading back from any NAND cells that are subject to a pending TRIM.
Is my pessimism justified, or is RECUVA more clever than I thought ?
N.B. 64 bit Recuva v1.42.544 under Windows 7 Ultimate + SP1 with Trim active has found 30821 files in C:\ on my 60 GB OCZ Vertex 2 SSD.
Almost none of them are more than 1 kB (i.e. within 1 file cluster) and are reported as "No overwritten clusters are detected"
There are 4 files last modified 12/03/2012 which are 11 kB (using 3 file clusters) and are also reported as "No overwritten clusters are detected"
Is the Recuva verdict correct, or is it (as I suspect) being misinformed.
Regards
Alan