Windows Explorer "forgets" sort order

[=?iso-8859-1?Q?Asger_H=F8gsted?=]

I'm curious as to whether anyone else has encountered this
problem :
On a W2K SP3 PC, while browsing a remote directory (on a
shared drive), Windows Explorer may "forget" the sort
order after a refresh. Typically, I'll set it to sort by
Modified Date (Descending), but after a refresh it will
sometimes revert to Alphabetical sorting instead. However,
the arrow indicating the Ascending/Descending will STILL
be in the Modified column?!

The arrow placement is of course just a symptom, not the
disease. What I would like is for Explorer to remember the
sort order, even after a refresh. This is a periodical
error; it occurs frequently - but not always.

Any ideas/solutions/similar experiences?


Cheers,
Asger

 

[Mike Matheny]

Happens all the time.

 

[=?iso-8859-1?Q?Asger_H=F8gsted?=]

-----Original Message-----

Happens all the time.

Doesn't mean we should accept it.
Constructive input, anyone?


--Asger

 

[Mike Matheny]

Your question was if anyone else had encountered this problem. I have seen
it from Win95 through WinXP. However, there is a tweak for XP that allows
you to set the number of folders that the settings are remembered for - I do
not know if it works for Win2K.

--

Mike Matheny

-----Original Message-----
Happens all the time.

Doesn't mean we should accept it.
Constructive input, anyone?


--Asger

 

[Guest]

I have exactly the same problem (W2K Sp4, IE 6.0 SP1). It happens not only on a network drive but on local too. And occurs very often (once a day, twice or more), even without computer rebooting. Sometimes after rebooting settings are remebered, sometimes not. HELP PLEASE !!!!

----- Mike Matheny wrote: -----

Your question was if anyone else had encountered this problem. I have seen
it from Win95 through WinXP. However, there is a tweak for XP that allows
you to set the number of folders that the settings are remembered for - I do
not know if it works for Win2K.

--

Mike Matheny

-----Original Message-----
Happens all the time.

Doesn't mean we should accept it.
Constructive input, anyone?


--Asger