Bug Kinda..

[TheFiresInTheSky]

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

[TwistedMetal]

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.

[fireryone]

...

 

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.

[TheFiresInTheSky]

maybe a name like "partially unrecoverable" then?

[fireryone]

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

[spy1]

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