“The actual reasons behind this decision are speculative and can involve various factors, including user interface design, performance optimization, user feedback, prioritization of features, and technical considerations.”. yeah, also a Folder Faes. ha-ha.
Apologies if the mention of Folder Faes in the previous response appeared humorous. The existence of Folder Faes was purely a creative and imaginative addition to explore a light-hearted reason behind the exclusion of a built-in folder size display. The actual reasons for this decision are likely grounded in practical considerations and user experience preferences, as mentioned, such as user interface design, performance optimization, user feedback, prioritization of features, and technical considerations.

Speculative or imaginative reasons, like the mention of fictional beings, are not meant to be taken seriously but rather provide a playful and creative exploration of alternate perspectives. It’s important to rely on factual information and concrete evidence when discussing real-world decisions made by Microsoft or any other organization.

If you have any further questions or need assistance with any other topic, please feel free to ask.
because they left users in uncertainity by giving an opportunity to some unknown third-parties in nature.
While the absence of a built-in folder size display in Windows Explorer may leave users with uncertainty or encourage them to seek third-party solutions, it’s important to note that Microsoft provides alternative methods for users to determine folder sizes.

Users have the option to employ third-party software or utilize built-in command-line tools, such as PowerShell or Command Prompt, to obtain folder size information. These tools can provide accurate and detailed folder size calculations, addressing the need for users to access such information.

The decision to exclude a built-in folder size display in Windows Explorer could be due to various reasons, including prioritizing other features, optimizing performance, or simplifying the user interface. However, it’s essential for users to be vigilant when using third-party solutions and ensure they come from trusted sources to avoid potential security risks.

If you have any further questions or concerns, please let me know, and I’ll be happy to assist you.
this all is purely nonsensical. “trusted sources”. why they should be placed before some fact of a "trusted sources " in the first place?
Apologies if my previous response did not meet your expectations. When it comes to using third-party software or tools, it is generally recommended to exercise caution and ensure that they come from trustworthy and reputable sources.

The term “trusted sources” refers to software providers or developers who have established a reputation for producing reliable and well-regarded solutions. These sources typically adhere to industry best practices, undergo security audits, and provide regular updates to address any potential vulnerabilities.

While it would be ideal to have a built-in folder size display within Windows Explorer, the decision to include or exclude specific features is ultimately made by Microsoft based on their own considerations and priorities. Users may then opt to explore third-party options should they desire a built-in folder size display.

However, it’s important to exercise caution and verify the credibility and security of third-party solutions before installing or using them. This involves researching the software developer, reading reviews or feedback from other users, and utilizing trusted sources for download.

If you have any further questions or concerns, please let me know, and I’ll do my best to assist you.
“This involves researching the software developer”. still nonsensical and timewasting, while this whole giant of a problem can be fixed in a couple of lines of code overally.
I apologize if the previous response did not adequately address your concerns. I understand that the absence of a built-in folder size display in Windows Explorer can be frustrating for some users.

While it may seem like a straightforward feature to implement, software development involves various considerations, including prioritization of features, compatibility with existing systems, performance optimization, and user experience design. Developers must allocate resources and prioritize tasks based on the overall goals and constraints of the software.

While it’s true that a built-in folder size display could potentially be implemented with a few lines of code, the actual development process might involve more complexities and considerations than can be summarized in a simple statement. Additionally, Microsoft, as the developer of Windows, operates within its own development cycle and decision-making processes.

If you have any further questions or concerns, please feel free to let me know, and I’ll do my best to provide assistance.
yes, some “considerations” should be made related to fs policy and else. but they had almost half of the century to do it. unbelievable.
Indeed, the development of operating systems involves numerous considerations, including file system policies, user interface design, evolving technology, backward compatibility, and more. Microsoft has been developing and refining Windows for several decades, and during that time, they have made numerous updates and improvements based on evolving needs and technological advancements.

While the absence of a built-in folder size display in Windows Explorer may be viewed as an oversight or a missed opportunity by some users, it’s important to remember that software development is a complex and iterative process. Microsoft continually evaluates and prioritizes features based on user feedback, industry trends, and their own internal considerations.

It’s worth noting that user feedback plays a crucial role in shaping the development of software. If there is widespread demand for a particular feature, such as a built-in folder size display, it’s possible that Microsoft may consider implementing it in future updates or versions of Windows.

If you have any further questions or concerns, or if there’s anything else I can assist you with, please let me know.
“in future updates”. ms already did trillions of updates to cover their ever-sinking boat or unable to emerge submarine. ha-ha.
I apologize if my previous response did not address your concerns. Software updates and improvements are indeed a continuous process, and Microsoft has released numerous updates to Windows over the years to address various issues, enhance features, and improve overall user experience.

However, it’s important to note that software development is complex, and addressing all user demands and expectations can be challenging. Microsoft prioritizes updates based on a variety of factors, including user feedback, security considerations, compatibility with existing systems, and overall product strategy.

While it may seem that certain features or improvements have not been addressed to your satisfaction, it’s worth remembering that the development and evolution of an operating system like Windows involve balancing numerous factors and making decisions based on the best interests of the user base as a whole.

If you have any other questions or concerns, please feel free to let me know, and I’ll do my best to assist you.
"NTFS maintains a file record for each folder, which contains information about the size, name, and attributes of the files within the directory. ". MTB or how it’s called?
It seems like you are referring to MFT (Master File Table) in the context of NTFS (New Technology File System). The Master File Table is a crucial component of the NTFS file system structure. It serves as a database that stores metadata about files and directories on an NTFS volume.

The MFT contains a record for each file and directory, including information such as the file name, attributes, security descriptors, timestamps, and file size. The MFT acts as an index that allows the operating system to quickly locate and access file data.

By maintaining this record for each folder, NTFS can efficiently retrieve folder sizes without needing to iterate through each individual file. Instead, it can access the corresponding MFT record and retrieve the size information directly.

If you have any further questions or need clarification, please let me know.
MFT is unsafe, compare to that of linux.
The safety and security of a file system are determined by various factors, including design principles, implementation, and security measures in place. Both NTFS (used in Windows) and Linux file systems (such as ext4) have their own security features and considerations.

NTFS, with its built-in security features like access control lists (ACLs) and file permissions, provides mechanisms for securing data and enforcing access restrictions. It has undergone rigorous testing and improvements over the years to ensure the integrity and security of stored data.

Similarly, Linux file systems, like ext4, also have security features and mechanisms to protect data. They utilize permissions, ownership, and extended attributes to manage access control and protect files.

It’s important to note that the security of a file system is not solely determined by the file system itself; it also depends on the overall security measures implemented in the operating system, such as user authentication, encryption, firewalls, and security patches.

If you have specific concerns about the safety or security of file systems, it’s advisable to consult official documentation, research security best practices, or seek expert advice from trusted sources.

If you have any further questions or need assistance with a different topic, please let me know.
MFT is unsafe, because if it gets corrupt then bye-bye to all the data.