Nah, it's not really that big of a deal in the grand scheme of things. I was talking to one of my friends about it this week and we both agreed that, back then, we both probably would have done the exact same thing.Looking back I could of course kick(start) myself for not simply going out and buying another box of disks.
Nah. I would be willing to bet that most people did that back then. Nobody thought, "hey this could be important to geeks 30 years from now." I overwrote my Workbench disks all the time as did most of my friends that were Amiga nuts. It was very common. No-one wanted to run a buggy old version if they could help it.sumfx wrote:Looking back I could of course kick(start) myself for not simply going out and buying another box of disks. Water under a 34 year old bridge I'm afraid. I will throw myself on the Sword of Aragon if it helps.
If the 1.2 image was DiskCopied, it's possible that was overwritten too. Depends on how 1.2 was written to the disk.A10001986 wrote:I think what above meant was to eventually recover data from a previous file system, before dumping a KS image on the first few tracks. On Commodore's KS 1.0 and 1.1 were some historic development files, IIRC.
It sounds as if just one over-write makes it difficult, even when using forensic techniques, and practically impossible after two over-writes. Makes me wonder if there's any merit to these secure erase schemes that claim you must over-write an HDD three dozen times with zeros, ones, and random data.Christian wrote:One could then subtract the signal from the new data, leaving what ever little amplitude of the overwritten data pattern remains and attempt to reconstruct the overwritten data.
Would this be successful? Most likely not as many years have passed, resulting in magnetic domain realignment. Also, one would have to recover every single bit correctly...