Two "Documents" folders in Vista

tried searching for this on the forum and on-line -- haven't come across a simple way to fix this.

originally i had ONE Documents folder. then i "moved" it to another drive by right-clicking > location. all was groovy. did the same for Music, Pictures, Videos

later, i discovered i now have TWO Documents folders. one has actual content (the one that i moved), and the other is empty. (Music, Pictures and Videos are fine.)

when i delete the empty Documents one, i can't access the one that isn't empty.

how to fix this?

 

Good read:
http://www.vistax64.com/tutorials/107990-personal-user-shell-folders-move-location.html

cheers ...

 

Vista must not like Documents folders...

shortly after i bought my computer and had it set up to my liking, i discovered that i couldnt access my documents folder. each time i would click it, the computer would freeze, i'd have to shut down completely and reboot to free it up. turns out the file was currupted, had to delete the Documents file and make a whole new file, no more problems so far

 

thanks for this. i just restored it, then moved it again. all seems well.

wow. Vista, eh.

 

It's not actually Vista's fault. Fragmentation and disk errors can cause multiple folders to exist.

 

So then it's the file system's fault, which becomes Microsoft's fault.

 

Actually, it's the user's fault for tinkering with a system folder - the "Documents" and other predefined folders that come with each user account are not just ordinary file system containers but specialized shells that are wired more deeply into the OS, and simply casually moving one around will produce undesirable effects that you don't get when simply relocating an ordinary folder.

Of course, one can also argue that it's Microsoft's fault as well for not indicating more clearly that these objects are "special" system objects that shouldn't be monkeyed with and not just run-of-the-mill folders like the ones a user can casually create, move, and destroy.

 

hmmm... didn't know that. but this is a clean install (just over 72 hours uptime) -- can this still happen?

and if MS didn't want us to able to "move" this folder, why is the functionality sort-of worked in / even allowed? it should just Work, IMO.

 

Granted, as I said, the folder should be identified as something other than just a "normal" folder; since it isn't, it really isn't an intentional fault of a user who does move it. Nonetheless, in describing why the negative consequences ocurred, that's because the user moved a special system folder.

As to why that design decision was taken, beats me, I didn't get the memo on that one!