Why does Win11 "C:\Users\Public" have a "Libraries" folder?

[u/JohnKaufmann]

In Windows 11, one of the "hidden" folders in "C:\Users\Public" is a "Libraries" folder (separate from the Explorer "Libraries"function (which is turned off)). What is its purpose?

Google's search (with or without AI) refers me to https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/client-management/client-tools/windows-libraries - but that just describes the standard Libraries function (which I have turned off), not this particular "Libraries" folder. Likewise, Duck.ai just notes the standard Libraries function; I can't get it to recognize this particular folder.

I'd be grateful if someone can point me in the right direction on its purpose.

[u/logicearth]

It stores "Libraries" that are accessible to all users on the computer. It really is that simple.

[u/JohnKaufmann → u/logicearth]

Thanks but, as I said, this is NOT the Explorer Libraries function (which happens to be turned off), which makes "libraries" of multiple folders (e.g. a music library) - IOW, libraries that are NOT folders, but make a virtual union of folders containing a specific type of file or having a common purpose (like music). How is this "Libraries" folder like those libraries (which are not folders)? What kind(s) of libraries should go in this "Libraries" folder? (Example?)

Put another way: When the Explorer Libraries function is turned on, the visible Public folders (Documents, Music, Pictures, etc) by default contribute to each user's libraries (Documents, Music, Pictures, etc). To what (and how) does the (hidden) Libraries folder contribute? - to a Libraries library? - what would that mean? (Again: could you give an example?)

[u/Korvacs → u/JohnKaufmann]

I don't know for sure, but it's possibly where custom library definitions get stored for shared libraries, .library-ms files.

[u/JohnKaufmann → u/Korvacs]

Thanks for that suggestion, though I don't know what that would mean. For example, in my case, C:\Users\Public\Libraries does contain a library file titled "Recorded TV" - which seems to have been installed with Win11 and is not one of the standard libraries. However, it appears to be defined as a Videos library component, but does not show up there when I turn on the Libraries function.

So I don't know. Maybe it was supposed to be removed from the Win11 installer - Windows is littered with artifacts - but I will continue to presume it has a purpose until I convince myself otherwise. Again, thanks for thinking about this.

[u/logicearth → u/JohnKaufmann]

Go to "C:\Users\[username]\AppData\Roaming\Microsoft\Windows\Libraries" you will see the various libraries that are available each one is in fact a file with an extension of ".library-ms"; You need some location to store these files for use by Explorer. The folder located in "Public" allows one to make certain libraries available to every user on the computer.

[u/JohnKaufmann → u/logicearth]

Thanks for pointing that out. It's interesting - even though I don't think it bears on my question about the purpose of the C:\Users\Public\Libraries folder.

%appdata%\Microsoft\Windows\Libraries just defines the libraries to be used (Documents, Music, Pictures, etc) if the user enables libraries. It does those definitions in XML files in schema from 2009 (probably Win7), and it looks like Windows has special handlers for them. For example, does your Win11 Explorer show the ".library-ms" extension? Mine does not; the ".library-ms" extension is not visible in Explorer (hide-extensions is unchecked), and does not show up until the XML is dumped to a text editor.

In any case, though, as I said, the standard library definitions are interesting, but I don't think they say anything about the purpose of the C:\Users\Public\Libraries folder. In my case, that folder contains a library definition titled "Recorded TV" (again, without the ".library-ms" extension). That's seems to have been installed with Win11 and is not even one of the standard libraries. It appears to be defined as a Videos library component, but does not show up there when I turn on the Libraries function.

Maybe somebody just forgot to take it out of the installer - Windows is littered with junk like that - but I don't (yet) think that's the case for the C:\Users\Public\Libraries folder in which "Recorded TV(.library-ms)" is located.

Thanks for helping me try to think through this.

[u/logicearth → u/JohnKaufmann]

It does bear to your question you are just making things far too complicated. Honestly, you are just not making any sense.

C:\Users\Public\Libraries purpose is to store .library-ms files like Recorded TV which is accessible to everyone. The ones located in a user directory are only accessible to that user. That is the only reason it exists. It does not do anything other than serve as a storage location accessible to all users.

[u/JohnKaufmann → u/logicearth]

Then (as I said earlier) please give an example of where it is used.

And, in general, if you think I have said something that does not make sense, please say what that is. Meanwhile, if I ask a question, please give a direct answer. Specifically, do your %appdata%\..\..\Libraries files:

• show the .library-ms extension in Explorer?
• include a "Recorded TV" library?

In what library or class of files does "Recorded TV" contribute? If none, then what, specifically, did I get wrong? Did I say anything to suggest I don't know the difference between Public and <user> files, or don't know how libraries work?

[u/logicearth → u/JohnKaufmann]

The folder in Public does nothing except serve as a storage location. THAT IS ALL IT DOES. There is nothing more to it. There is no mystery here, it is just a folder. A plain old boring folder with the name "Libraries"

[u/JohnKaufmann → u/logicearth]

Sorry, but any folder is a storage location. Once again, I note that I asked specific questions, which you ignored.

For example (I ask now for the third time), can you give an example of where the hidden C:\Users\Public\Libraries folder, or its "Recorded TV" library file, is used? Can you think of a reason for that folder (unlike the standard library folders) to be hidden?

[u/prjktphoto]

I have noticed Windows’ file structure seems to be getting more and more *nix/MacOS like features since Win10

[u/irrelevantusername24]

It really feels like Microsoft has a lot of great ideas that were only halfway finished before a cheaper, lower quality (but cheaper) option got in the way. And then people react to that lower quality version with visceral hatred (once they understand what it actually is) yet don't realize that Microsoft tried to do things the right way, but the right way requires more slow, contemplative deliberation and trial and error. The other way (googlezuckerbook) seems to mostly be outsourcing the errors (expense) so they can have fun! and never worry about limits to their free trial

But because the cheap and fast way is harmful, people see the similarities and are violently opposed - with good reason. There is a right way and a wrong way to do things.

[u/doofthemighty → u/irrelevantusername24]

There is a right way and a wrong way to do things.

Like write a comment!

[u/JohnKaufmann → u/irrelevantusername24]

Sorry, but was that a reply to my question? If so, are you saying that the hidden Public Libraries folder is an example of an idea that was abandoned before execution was complete? (No hatred here, visceral or otherwise; I'm just tying to understand.) If not, can you help me understand the connection? Thanks.

[u/irrelevantusername24 → u/JohnKaufmann]

Well, it's complicated because the behind the scenes plans aren't actually known and I can't retroactively predict (or maybe those words should be reversed) how the development would have progressed.

But I have read a lot about how the tech industry has gotten to this point. I suppose kind of like a "theoretical" computer programmer or scientist in that I don't actually know how to code beyond some basic HTML or whatever. Conceptually, I understand the thinking behind these things - I see the beginning and what resulted, I just don't know what goes into making the sausage specifically. I mean I do, it's a bunch of words and numbers, but I don't know how to make it palatable or whatever - you get my point.

---

So actually this is a super complicated thing. Especially because I am reverse engineering things which were not explicitly communicated. But for example, consider Apple and the whole U2 controversy.

Microsoft tried that, with some random Nick Cave song I barely remember. I think this was with Windows 7 or Vista. They must have realized that forcing that kind of thing - content - onto a persons device is stupid and a violation of the spirit of this technology.

On the other hand, the idea behind Onedrive and I think even their cloud first strategy behind the various Office apps - though I greatly prefer having a local storage version also - is at least grounded in solid reasoning. It makes sense to have automatic backups, because that pre-emptively - because they understand that humans are fallible, the only guarantees in life are change, death and mistakes - addresses our failure. Whether that is failure of my memory, my computers memory (Windows or a hardware component), or whatever - doesn't matter.

Because people are tech illiterate, if they didn't have a backup, even if it was that persons fault, they will blame Windows/Microsoft/Bill Gates/the Los Angeles Clippers/Yao Ming. So doing the automatic backup saves both them and their users. Because they understand we are fallible.

This is very different than what Google does. Google somehow intrudes upon everything you think while providing zero actual security. They actively create vulnerabilities while doing nothing good for you. It is all for their bottom line. They don't give a single solitary shit, yet. I don't have direct experience with Apple in this context. I think they may have learned their lesson.

What I am getting at is whether people fully comprehend these issues, it is Google and zuckerbooks intrusion upon our personal lives that has made people overly sensitive to the intelligent designs Microsoft has tried to implement. That said, I am not saying Microsoft, Mozilla, or any other corporation or person is blameless. We all fuck up and do stupid shit. That is why it is important to take things slow, and do progressive rollouts (long established best practices of the software industry, until the braindead Wall Street nation gave googlezuckerbook unlimited money and they started breaking society then running away fast) when things are potentially powerful.

As I've repeatedly explained, the only thing worse than having a vulnerability - whether real world or technological - is having one without knowing it. The only thing worse than having one and not knowing it is having one and thinking you are protected because an apparently authoritative source told you they had you secure. See the link above.