Empty Folders Take Long Time to Delete...

Came across that one and wondered if it might help... as it was only the one account.

Weird what catches Windows out sometimes.

Khan N Singh said:

Hey Dal, this seemed to do it! I love ya! Thanks!

No progress bar, just instantaneous deletion of the empty folder.

Thanks!

And, thanks to everyone else who took the time to offer suggestions.

I had the same issue. This method worked for me too!

Happy to hear it.. f. explorer's history can affect Quick Access adversely too, sometimes, it seems.

dalchina said:

Happy to hear it.. f. explorer's history can affect Quick Access adversely too, sometimes, it seems.

I appreciate your suggestion. I've gotten used to it pretty much over time, but saw this thread and subscribed to it. And you suggested that idea. I tried it out, made a folder on the Desktop, made a new folder inside the Desktop folder, and made so many copies of that empty folder inside. When I delete, even just 3, empty folders, that "Deleting" messagebox pops up, and stays at 99% for about 3,4,5 seconds or so, then disappears. I got used to it like I said. But then I deleted like over 10 empty folders, and that messagebox never appeared! Which is great!

Thank you again =)

Khan N Singh said:

Interesting. Must keep this in mind.

I thought something became corrupt in the Master File Table (MFT) which writes down in the drive where there's folders, and maybe that "section" of the MFT got corrupt, which made the computer take up some time to write necessary information about deleting folders or something.
But yea, I'm so glad that issue is now resolved. It's kinda sad/annoying how solutions to various problems, are so.... out of the way, that it would have to practically be some sort of random attempt for a solution really.

Because honestly, like I said, I thought it was the MFT, and the most reasonable solution attempt would be to defragment the whole drive, which I've tried on the SSD, with no result.

I miss the Windows XP days, where the operating system... never had one single issue. Can we go back to those standards of how an operating system works please? That would be so very much appreciated.

Also, on a more technical note: I only want to be notified/subscribed/etc of Security Updates ONLY to Windows 10. No quality updates, no "improvement" updates, no "new features" updates. None of that. I only want Security Updates ONLY. That's all that I've ever wanted in life.

Also, on a more technical note: I only want to be notified/subscribed/etc of Security Updates ONLY to Windows 10. No quality updates, no "improvement" updates, no "new features" updates. None of that. I only want Security Updates ONLY. That's all that I've ever wanted in life.

@pepanee

- set updates to 'Notify' in Group Policy (it is described in a tutorial)
- updates will not then be applied until you approve them (1 possible exception applies - past end of life of a build)
- set target feature update (search for that in the Tutorials section) - also Group Policy
- no upgrade beyond the build you specify

dalchina said:

@pepanee

- set updates to 'Notify' in Group Policy (it is described in a tutorial)
- updates will not then be applied until you approve them (1 possible exception applies - past end of life of a build)
- set target feature update (search for that in the Tutorials section) - also Group Policy
- no upgrade beyond the build you specify

I understand there's methods of avoiding installing updates, but there will be lots of inconsistencies with many other things, if I skip updates. In Windows XP, back then, it was very simple to choose which updates you want, and which ones you don't want.
And with Windows 10, you will have to eventually do the semi-annual "big update", because older builds will become unsupported anymore. I'm not going to bother with confusing myself with all that.

I was just saying that it would be really great if the customer has the choice to choose which updates they approve of, while everything else will work perfectly the way they should, and still have Windows supported by Microsoft. But that doesn't apply anymore in today's standards.

Lots of general "inconsistencies" in logic now-a-days. Would be nice if the idea of "reliable structure" in all ideas is enforced, and people stood by those standards. That doesn't apply anymore today.
It's pretty sad really. Because "reliable structure" in things makes things very strong and successful, and really dependable-on.

It's okay; the general structure of my life is pretty much a hit or a miss as well now-a-days;
One day I can wake up, and on another day, there's the possibility that ... well... I'd stay asleep =)
hehehe

So you don't actually want what you said was the only thing you wanted.