Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-tis!ames!vsi1!octopus!pete
From: pete@octopus.UUCP (Pete Holzmann)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: Spinrite Concerns
Summary: Some well founded, some unfounded.
Message-ID: <329@octopus.UUCP>
Date: 24 Aug 88 16:41:39 GMT
References: <3857@tekgvs.GVS.TEK.COM>
Reply-To: pete@octopus.UUCP (Pete Holzmann)
Organization: Octopus Enterprises, Cupertino CA
Lines: 69

In article <3857@tekgvs.GVS.TEK.COM> toma@tekgvs.GVS.TEK.COM (Tom Almy) writes:
>Seeing nothing but raves for this product here...
[actually, I posted some complaints in my generally favorable review]

>1).  The "hype" that comes with the product strongly suggests that those people
>who make backups are wasting their time, and that the use of Spinrite
>eliminates the need to make backups since Spinrite will find failing sectors
>first.

Well, not really. It says that you don't need to do a backup before running
SpinRite, since it re-formats without losing data. That's 100% true.

The one really bad claim I found in an advertising blurb was "...you'll never
have ANY PROBLEMS with your hard disks. GUARANTEED!" That is obviously hype.
If someone interprets that as meaning that backups will never be needed,
or that hard disks will never mechanically fail, they've obviously succumbed
to the hype.

It *would* make sense for the documentation to explain the importance of a
good backup regimen, even with SpinRite in use.
>(Interesting that it takes less time to
>do daily tape or weekly Fastback backups than it does to do a monthly Spinrite
>thorough analysis!)
But you don't need to do the 'thorough analysis' more than once. Frequent
'quicky' reformats take care of the rest of the problems that may occur.

>2).  This product is addictive (and not in a nice way!).  The first time it 
>is run it will take blocks marked as bad and mark them as good again!  Because
>these block are marginal, you must run Spinrite on a regular basis to refresh
>and retest the sectors.  Just using the program once and putting it away is
>riskier than never running it at all.  I must admit that there is a way to
>prevent Spinrite from marking bad blocks as good, but you have to go out of
>your way to do it.

This is basically wrong. The blocks that it tests and returns to good use
could hardly be classified as 'marginal'. If you read the technical
documentation, you'll understand that:
	1) Most of the 'bad blocks' in an old hard disk have been added
		by CHKDSK, due to low-level format degradation. A new
		low level format restores these areas 100%. There was NEVER
		anything wrong on the physical disk.
	2) Actual surface defects on the disk will be found by the SpinRite
		thorough testing. It is a more intense test than drive
		manufacturers use for the most part!
	3) On a new drive, there's a defect list. DOS just wipes out the
		whole track in all cases, even though there's a high
		probability that the actual defect is located where it
		won't cause any interference with data on the track. SpinRite
		tests the track to see if this is the case. If the defect
		will not interfere, it returns the track to good use. This
		is not 'marginal'. 

Finally, the 'quicky' reformat that you do frequently will find and mark
new physical defects. It will NOT return anything marked bad to 'ok'. That
is only done by the 'thorough' analysis.

Running SpinRite once on a drive is most definitely better than never having
run it at all.

>Tom Almy
>toma@tekgvs.TEK.COM

Pete

[Standard disclaimer applies: I'm just a reasonably happy customer...]
-- 
  OOO   __| ___      Peter Holzmann, Octopus Enterprises
 OOOOOOO___/ _______ USPS: 19611 La Mar Court, Cupertino, CA 95014
  OOOOO \___/        UUCP: {hpda,pyramid}!octopus!pete
___| \_____          Phone: 408/996-7746