>>So, you found a way to raise your heart rate to max, without exercise! ;-)
>
>>
>>Seriously, thanks for sharing your experiences. Did you find out if the Linux ntsfundelete had any name collisions?
>
>
>There were none : after moving the files again into fitting directories, they were identical.
>
>>Another option I've heard of but not used - Ultimate Boot CD for Windows (UBCD4Win). It apparently includes Recuva for data recovery: http://www.ubcd4win.com/contents.htm . Although looks a bit dated, last ~ 4 years ago.
>>The UBCD itself does not seem to include data recovery tools, but Hiren's Boot CD also includes Recuva: http://www.hiren.info/pages/bootcd
>>I haven't used any of these CDs.
>
>That is part of the problem: using SW from sources you don't know - how well are they tested for virus or basic usability ?
>M y strategies are: use DVD from well known publications (mostly german c't, a boot CD perhaps if coming from another well tested publication house), or pin-point solutions tested by c't or on different places in the internet. Also large linux distros: they are well tested to support new HW, have NTFS support by now and sometimes help where Win-specifics fail (formating 3TB with Fat32 for TV on USB3 with "windows-special" tools went nowhere fast, even using stuff capable of formating discs >32GB like 512GB - GPartED to the rescue).
>
>Will look again for a newer Boot disc with such tools, but am trying to build my own tested xCopy toolkit for win, as I don't see myself moving into a linux as main desktop OS - esp. with the new ubuntu desktop. Host for VM - why not, is speedier than windoze. I remember some effort to compile portable solutions - will look there again, as such a setup IMO is even better than a VM array. Might also buy the Pandora Portable version, but unless again with back to wall will not buy typical install tools again.
>
>Is also part of my beef with MS: WTF are they changing always the GUI and usability, but do not offer such basic swiss army knife functionality ? Recovery tools are more important part of the OS than playing hide and seek with menus and links. The defrag routines of XP were not great when compared as to # of options, but they had minimal GUI showing file/disc status. In win7 you get a number - is that # of fragmented blocks or files ? Dumbing down is not a good way IMO, but MS thinks otherwise ? On all large external disks is some backup tool wanting to install ? I want xCopy backup tools, so I am not forced to always save the install with my backups and hope for the best. Win installation concept broken IMO, esp. for system-near tools.

MS's philosophy is due to a lot of things, here are some of them:

1. Regular users vs. power users. Regular users are 90+% of the population. They don't want to see techy utilities at all. The needs of the many means MS dumbs things down. From what I've seen Apple does the same thing, and Canonical is as well with Unity on Ubuntu (not to mention GNOME3).

2. Some built-in utilities like backup (Symantec) and defrag (Execsoft) started out as licensed, feature-limited versions of those other vendors' products. Under the licensing terms MS could not make them more capable.

I've heard good things about Linux Mint for those who don't want to get experimental UIs imposed on them.