For God's sake! Fix the Folder View settings bug!


Recommended Posts

Hey everyone,

i have this exact same problem.

Another one which I would like fixed is where I have resized my window or whatever, and then closed the folder window. When I open it up again it is the same very small size. i change it back and close it but it is now stuck as coming up quite small and rectangular. Really ticking me off

Medking

So, how about this:

Everyone that has replied to this thread complaining about the alleged bug- have you tweaked Vista at all, and if so, what tweak?

Disable UAC, mucked with Readyboost, etc.?

'cause if you're going to claim a bug, it has to be reproduced.

^-- Meh, totally unrelated tidbits. WGA team != shell team.

Tao's spot on: how do you repro this?

It is true that a user applied custom view should override / turn off the folder view content sniffer, so the question then gets to be: what is awry here and causing the issue?

And why is the columns in details view very, very small. I have to keep right-clicking on the tiitle head and click "Size all culumns to all" on every folder. How do I make it the default.
Have you ever thought about uploading a screen shot so we know what you're talking about?

I have not enabled any tweaks except VistaGlazz.

I don't know what is doing this behaviour. When I changed, for example, my downloads folder (not the default download folder but my custom downloads folder on my other drive). When I set it to show details with information about each download. After a while like in the afternoon, the view setting of the download folder has changed to all tiles and tools in the blue toolbar shows tools related to music like Play. There are actually NO music in the folder, only pictures executible files I downloaded from the net. So what I do is I have to change it BACK to my prefered setting but that too won't last longer as it changes to thumbnails with pictures tools. What I would like it to do is LEAVE MY FOLDERS ALONE. It did not have my permission to change anything without my consent.

tao muon, to answer your request, I've created a new folder with some example new files as well as some of my downloads. Look at the columns. That is the DEFAULT widths. The only difference is that I've made the folder window size bigger since it looks small on my 20" widescreen lcd. What I mean is that it's hard to work out what files they are, especaially I have a folder full of PixelPerfect and all files starts with "PixelPerfect".....

post-30282-1182308164_thumb.jpg

Edited by ozgeek

first of all, its God's SAKE. not *STAKE* it would've been funny as hell if you went around the rest of your life saying that and been corrected in person and looked like a fool rather than an online forum.

and back to topic, this DID happen in Windows XP from time to time, however i havent seen this in Vista once (based on 3 months). why? maybe because i have five total folders that i use : Music, Pictures, Documents, Downloads, Videos. done deal, no exceptions. obviosuly the system has its own folders that it creates, but those are the only folders i ever access and every modify. my system stays ultra fast, easy to defragment, backup and clean.

^-- Meh, totally unrelated tidbits. WGA team != shell team.

Tao's spot on: how do you repro this?

It is true that a user applied custom view should override / turn off the folder view content sniffer, so the question then gets to be: what is awry here and causing the issue?

I was speaking in terms of eagerness/willingness to fix a problem. Glitches like this rarely ever get fixed, but you can bet your tail that there will always be an updated version of WGA.

It seems to happen to me when i navigate between folders, e.g. i click up a few times to go to the desktop, then use the history to go back to my downloads folder, and the view is reset.

I normally have it on tiles, grouped, sorted by modification date, sometimes it reverts to tiles, ungrouped, sorted by date, sometimes it forgets the tiles all together.

I was speaking in terms of eagerness/willingness to fix a problem. Glitches like this rarely ever get fixed, but you can bet your tail that there will always be an updated version of WGA.

Oh, so WGA releases come out more often than vulnerability fixes, shell patches, exploit patches and...?

Whatever. I think Vista has had two WGA 'updates' since RTM. And how many monthly patches, and 'out of band' security fixes?

Yeah, ok.

We've heard reports of this, but have never been able to reproduce it internally (either in a test environment, or even just on any of our own daily use machines). It's possible some third-party tools or add-in is messing things up, but it's hard to say for sure without a solid repro case and a debugger.

We've heard reports of this, but have never been able to reproduce it internally (either in a test environment, or even just on any of our own daily use machines). It's possible some third-party tools or add-in is messing things up, but it's hard to say for sure without a solid repro case and a debugger.
Exactly.

How can you fix a bug if you can't even establish 'one' verifiable circumstance when it happens?

And, for some reason, people won't tell you what's been installed, what registry tweaks, what other things have been done.

But, they still complain about it and expect it to be fixed?

I guess it's true what they say: "You're either part of the problem or part of the solution."

Oh, so WGA releases come out more often than vulnerability fixes, shell patches, exploit patches and...?

Whatever. I think Vista has had two WGA 'updates' since RTM. And how many monthly patches, and 'out of band' security fixes?

Yeah, ok.

You're missing my point. Yes, they do fix security vulnerabilities, as well as update WGA, but how often do you ever see a patch on WU that fixes annoying non-security related problems? About the only ones I see are there to fix problems caused by a security patch.

Lets just forget this discussion and get back on topic. Sorry to bring it up.

You're missing my point. Yes, they do fix security vulnerabilities, as well as update WGA, but how often do you ever see a patch on WU that fixes annoying non-security related problems? About the only ones I see are there to fix problems caused by a security patch.

Lets just forget this discussion and get back on topic. Sorry to bring it up.

So what do you think is more important- security / vulerability fixes or GUI / 'format my columns and view' patches?

Does that explain why you see more of one and not the other?

Would you rather they fix serious problems first or your GUI problems?

Don't you think rendering issues can wait til the service pack?

Personally, I don't have ANY problems with folders remembering their view state, so this is a non-issue to me. But for those that complain, what is the problem with prioritizing?

Same here... Whats also dumb is when I make a new folder it sometimes shows a album art image for the folder when the folder is not even in my music folder, why it would do that anyways even if I did make a new folder in my music folder. And when in the c: drive theres some folders in there that have album art set for its folder when I didn't even set it to do that, when trying to set it back to it original state it doesn't let me.

And one time I went into my music folder and a some of my folders set with album art were all mixed around, so I had to redo a butch of folders to get them back to the way I had them.

Plus Vista is slow at booting up, slow at moving files around, superfetch doesn't do jack... all in all its one big system hog piece of s**t. And yes, my system is double the system requirements.

Guess thats why I switched to Ubuntu.

You're missing my point. Yes, they do fix security vulnerabilities, as well as update WGA, but how often do you ever see a patch on WU that fixes annoying non-security related problems? About the only ones I see are there to fix problems caused by a security patch.

If it's not a security issue or something incredibly prevalent and disasterous (data loss, etc) - then it's not worth it to release it via WU. Fixes like that would come in a service pack, or in the next version. And possibly released as an on-request hotfix if it's important enough.

Same here... Whats also dumb is when I make a new folder it sometimes shows a album art image for the folder when the folder is not even in my music folder, why it would do that anyways even if I did make a new folder in my music folder. And when in the c: drive theres some folders in there that have album art set for its folder when I didn't even set it to do that, when trying to set it back to it original state it doesn't let me.

And one time I went into my music folder and a some of my folders set with album art were all mixed around, so I had to redo a butch of folders to get them back to the way I had them.

Plus Vista is slow at booting up, slow at moving files around, superfetch doesn't do jack... all in all its one big system hog piece of s**t. And yes, my system is double the system requirements.

Guess thats why I switched to Ubuntu.

Riiiiiiiiiight

We've heard reports of this, but have never been able to reproduce it internally (either in a test environment, or even just on any of our own daily use machines). It's possible some third-party tools or add-in is messing things up, but it's hard to say for sure without a solid repro case and a debugger.

Just for a reference point. I've installed Vista Home Premium On my Wife's box a week ago. And with NO programs installed, the problem was evident. I just reformatted and re-installed Vista Home Premium OEM on my box. Clean install, NO programs added, Just Vista. The problem is evident now as I type this.

Edited by UncleSpellbinder
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • My father still uses a programme written in dbase3. Still manages to work with a little help from dosbox. 
    • Microsoft hides these secret Windows 11 performance boost settings available on every PC by Sayan Sen Windows enthusiasts often look for ways to extract as much performance out of their systems as possible, and it's often the case that they try and do so while trying to minimize the heat and power consumption. This is especially relevant in the case of mobile Windows PCs since laptops and notebooks tend to get hot and management of that heat and power is harder in such a form factor. As such users often turn to techniques like under-volting which can be used to squeeze out the maximum capabilities of a chip while also maintaining lowered power levels. There are official apps from AMD and Intel with the likes of Ryzen Master and XTU (Extreme Tuning Utility). While these are quite handy, most enthusiasts probably prefer to dig into the BIOS and play around with settings there like Curve Optimizer on Ryzen, which lets users set various frequency-voltage scaling values. These are essentially called P-States. If you are not familiar with them, Processor Power Management is done through Advanced Configuration and Power Interface (ACPI) P-states and C-states. While P-states or performance pwoer states handle CPU voltage-frequency scaling, C-states deal with CPU sleep states so that some of the CPU functions, which are not necessary at that moment, can be disabled. The P-states and C-states work together to make the processor run more efficiently. It helps the OS and apps determine which cores can be parked and which should be boosted. Of course not every user is an enthusiast or knows the technicalities and integrities of how things like overclocking or undervolting work. Thankfully for them Windows itself offers something pretty cool, though it is hidden by default on all systems. By default, Windows only has two P-States, "Minimum Processor State" and "Maximum Processor State." However, this can be changed with a Registry trick to expand the options under a secret "Processor performance boost mode" dropdown. This essentially enables the HWP or hardware P-States available on a device, and these are not controlled just by the OS itself as the underlying hardware gets involved too. In total there are five Processor Performance Boost Mode profiles that control how Windows requests and allows CPU turbo/boost behavior under the different power policies. They are: Disabled: In this mode, processor boosting is effectively turned off. The CPU will avoid entering turbo or boost frequencies and instead operate closer to its base frequency ceiling. This can significantly reduce power consumption and heat output, but at the cost of reduced burst performance and responsiveness in short workloads. Enabled: This is the standard behavior where boost functionality is allowed under normal conditions. The processor can opportunistically increase frequency when workload demands it, balancing performance gains with power and thermal constraints as managed by the system. Aggressive: Aggressive mode favors performance more heavily, allowing the CPU to enter higher boost states more readily and sustain them longer. This should in theory improve responsiveness under bursty or heavy workloads but increases power draw and thermal output compared to the default enabled behavior. Efficient Enabled: This mode still allows boosting, but with a stronger bias toward energy efficiency. The system attempts to use boost more selectively, avoiding unnecessary frequency spikes when the performance gain is marginal. Efficient Aggressive: This is a hybrid approach where boost is still performance-responsive, but the system continuously weighs efficiency more heavily than in Aggressive mode. It aims to deliver noticeable performance improvements while reducing wasted power in less demanding scenarios. Here's how to enable the Processor performance boost mode: Open Registry Editor: Press Win+R, type regedit, and click OK. Go to: HKLM\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\Power\PowerSettings\54533251-82be-4824-96c1-47b60b740d00\be337238-0d82-4146-a960-4f3749d470c7 (where HKLM stands for HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE_) Modify the value of Attributes from 1 to 2 (you can find modify option by right-clicking) After that, exit Registry, you should now be able to see the new "Processor performance boost mode" dropdown menu: As you can see there are now five new P-States or CPPC states or power profile available that help define the boost mode processor setting on your PC. Wrapping it up here's a quick run-down of the settings as defined by Microsoft itself. Setting Description Disabled The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is disabled. Collaborative Processor Performance Control (CPPC) behaviour is disabled. Enabled The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is enabled. CPPC behaviour is Efficient Enabled. Aggressive The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is enabled. CPPC behaviour is Aggressive. Efficient Enabled The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is Efficient. CPPC behaviour is Efficient Enabled. Efficient Aggressive The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is Efficient. CPPC behaviour is Aggressive. Aggressive At Guaranteed Windows calculates the desired extra performance above the guaranteed performance level, and asks the processor to deliver that specific performance level. Efficient Aggressive At Guaranteed Windows always asks the processor to deliver the highest possible performance above the guaranteed performance level. In the next part we shall be comparing these settings to explore how much of a benefit or regression they can provide in terms of performance and power efficiency. If you decide to change the values on your system and are experiencing problems like crashes or an overheating PC, make sure to revert the steps back to the original state.
    • I think he means you haven't reviewed previous UFC games. Of course it doesn't matter... Every time you just report on something that involves the President even if just simply what happened you guys usually get accused of being anti-Trump. We live in fun times.
  • Recent Achievements

    • One Month Later
      Leroy Jethro Gibbs earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Conversation Starter
      flexorcist earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • One Month Later
      AndreaB earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • One Month Later
      agatameier earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      agatameier earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      518
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      198
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      147
    4. 4
      ATLien_0
      93
    5. 5
      Steven P.
      78
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!