How big is your one?

Check your system folder:

C:\Windows\winsxs

Mine is 16GB (on a 140GB drive)

Have googled extensively in the past day or so, and have had little success in dealing with it. Who's got the answer? You'll be an international genius if you do.

5.87 GB on (1TB Drive)

Google's top answer explains it http://www.winvistaclub.com/f16.html

Edited by deleted (Tue 01-Mar-11 04:02:00)

I understand that 'in theory' the space isn't being taken up, but Windows, DOS, Treesize, and a few other programs (defrag!!) see the space as used.

Now if all those programs which see that space as used, then it is logical to assume that if you fill your drive to capacity, it will return "out of space" messages. Whether or not it's really being used, Windows sees it as such, so it might as well be.

10.6gig on 500gig

Who cares? Buy a bigger disk. Disk space is cheaper than worrying about the size of that folder.

Same here on a 98GB partition of a 500GB drive

In reply to a post by NeMs:

5.87 GB on (1TB Drive)

Google's top answer explains it http://www.winvistaclub.com/f16.html

No it isn't.

Not only will I have to buy (spend vs tweak), but I'll have to reinstall, when I have a pretty good setup otherwise. That's playing into the hands of MS. They don't want their OSs being reinstalled if they can avoid it. They would rather people upgraded (spent money). The hardware folk don't mind either.

Believe it or not I actually enjoy learning about what makes the thing tick, and since my two year old system is as heavily loaded as ever before, but is faster than ever, I reckon there's little point in upgrading.

£200+ for a worthwhile replacement (and all the tweaks to be done again) vs no layout and a faster system today...no contest.

Seriously cam, you should ditch Vista and move to 7. It's only £70 if you insist on buying it.

and then he can do it all over again

For comparison, on an XP system that was a fresh install 5 years ago - 78.6 MB

Don't delete it as deleting it could stop some of your applications from working. The more apps you install the bigger it will get especially if the app you install relies on an older DLL/Library. Which with newer versions of windows such as Vista and 7 is more likely, hence why their is such a huge difference in size from XP.

Sadly this something completely out of your control and you just have to deal with it.

50.6 mb on XP on a 2 year old installation.

7Gb on a 500Gb drive, not bothered as there is plenty of room on the drive. As long as I get the software I want on it that is that matters, i use another drive for files.

In reply to a post by nredwood:

For comparison, on an XP system that was a fresh install 5 years ago - 78.6 MB

XP didn't use the sxs folder in the same way as Vista et seq, it had all those Uninstall things etc and "DLL hell" instead.

I'm looking at a 24 GB SXS folder on a vista SP2 machine - a laptop with a 60 GB drive

Discussed here: WinSxs Folder consuming enormous disk space but doesn't really solve it.

Sorry, I'm late but only found this this year.

10.5Gb on a 181Gb partition,
55,943 files. 15002 folders
split the disk in 2 and left half as another drive letter just for the photos I will not fill before computer is changed or drive dies. Only used 41 Gb in the photos D drive.

Did come as one drive when new, I split it when reinstalling from a Norton ghost back up.

Big mistake.

Now half available space of the C drive partition left as did a windows 8 upgrade from 7.

I find windows uses so much space and not got games, hundred or thousands of songs ( no songs).

Just the bit of editing programs, Microsoft office 2007 and the usual updates and windows stuff.

Hark disks cheap but a pain to change or replace if it dies, changing a big one to even bigger because of microsofts strange way if working, not good.

Still got machine how I like with space enough for the updates and what ever it wants to do so will be ok I guess and windows 7 never worked, on machine when bought and always stops responding and crashing on the most boring of tasks not pushing the thing like outlook email and internet explorer.

Did the windows upgrade in January when going cheap and is better, read when new in October, November time people did not like and worse, me argue that fact. I like, more stable and crashes every now and then but not anything like it did.

Off the point of the original question but my 10 pence worth.

The simple solution to everyone moaning about this is to upgrade to Windows 8. It will fix all your problems and also improve performance.

Got any free, legal licenses to share out?

Why should we spend more money to get a flaw fixed, when we spent money already?

/checks Pipexer's profile for "Occupation : MS salesman"

It is a flaw in your opinion, Microsoft make no guarantees for the size of the Windows folder, only recommendations. Also, numerous lab tests will show that the WinSxS folder does not grow abnormally large under normal use - it is 3rd party programs causing this, and when it comes to installing 3rd party programs, well, anything goes!

You should have upgraded when the offer was on - MS made it available for long enough. I paid the £25 for the upgrade in January, the best £25 I have spent on software, I think you would have been very impressed by the performance improvements.

The only times I have seen big WinSxS folders I have also observed that when running an sfc /scannow there are integrity violations and corrupt files - suggesting there is more at play here.

I am not saying it is your fault but I don't think it is Microsofts fault either. When Vista came out there was a hell of a lot of 3rd party software claiming to work with Vista (including security products) which were not fit for purpose, this was one of the problems.

I don't work for Microsoft - but if anyone from MS is reading and is impressed by all my praise, feel free to PM me a job offer

Edited by Pipexer (Sun 07-Apr-13 21:01:04)

In reply to a post by Pipexer:

It is a flaw in your opinion

No. Either the winsxs folder takes up space, or it misreports the space. It's a flaw in the OS.

In reply to a post by Pipexer:

You should have upgraded when the offer was on - MS made it available for long enough. I paid the £25 for the upgrade in January, the best £25 I have spent on software, I think you would have been very impressed by the performance improvements.

Didn't know of the offer, but wouldn't have taken it anyway. There's little to upgrade for, given that this is a 4-year old system.

In reply to a post by Pipexer:

The only times I have seen big WinSxS folders I have also observed that when running an sfc /scannow there are integrity violations and corrupt files - suggesting there is more at play here.

Nope. That would have to be IVs and CFs for 4 years now. No chance.

In reply to a post by Pipexer:

I am not saying it is your fault but I don't think it is Microsofts fault either.

There's where we differ. I do apportion blame to the problems of a product being down to the maker of the product, rather than the users of the product. I don't come up with solutions which involve the user spending £100+ to jump from a flawed product to a product which has no great advantage to the user over the previous product.

It's obvious you're sold on Windows 8, but don't force it down our throats, and don't assume there's some problem with peoples systems because of a flawed OS.

Is it?

On my Windows 8 system the WinSxs folder is 10GB containing 53,526 Files & 14,089 Folders.

That's on a 60GB partition.

ETA The Windows folder in total uses 19.4GB with 81,926 Files & 17,973 Folders.

Edited by IanBB (Sun 07-Apr-13 22:00:13)

Yes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_8#Hardware_requ...

So you are complaining that Windows 8 is using up the space outlined in the minimum system requirements , did you expect it to use less than they told you it would?

Edited by Pipexer (Sun 07-Apr-13 22:20:14)

Who said I was complaining?

You seemed to be disputing that Windows 8 fixes the problem, you have to remember that WinSxS is not an optional part of Windows, it is part of Windows, and the space it uses up can be treated as operating system files. As you said your total Windows folder amounts just to under 20GB, which is almost exactly what Microsoft state Windows 8 will need, so you can't say anything is wrong with that.

So indeed by upgrading to Windows 8 you will fix the problem of WinSxS growing astronomically large, however that does not mean it will go away totally - it just means it will stay roughly the same (and from all the tests I have done on various systems - it is always around the same).

Edited by Pipexer (Sun 07-Apr-13 22:24:45)

Interesting to see that the HDD space requirements quoted in both the Windows 8 and Windows 7 articles is the same: 32-bit-16GB; 64-bit 20GB.

FWIW on my nearly 2-year old Windows 7 Pro system, the system partition is 200GB, the Windows folder is 22.8GB, 88,519 files, 18,730 folders. The Winsxs folder is 9.50GB, 53,306 files, 13,413 folders.

So perhaps 10% over the quoted space requirements, but the system is probably carrying a bit of overhead from add-ons I've installed. WinDirStat tells me the Installer folder is the 2nd largest after Winsxs at 4GB. I'm guessing that is for Windows updates and the like, don't know if any application stuff (whether MS or otherwise) goes in there.

Am I concerned? Certainly not. ~10% of the partition, ~2% of the actual HDD, for the system is negligible.

As a comparison, though perhaps not a very good one, how much of the volume of a car is taken up by the engine, transmission, steering and suspension, fuel tank? I suspect more than 10%.

[Edit to add age]

Edited by cheshire_man (Sun 07-Apr-13 22:46:50)

No.

I was just comparing the size of that folder to my partition size as most of the previous posters in this thread have already done (considering this thread started 2 years ago!)

Obviously I do understand that it is part of Windows, the fact it lives in the Windows directory does seem to indicate that...

Anyhow, you state that it will stay the same size. It probably will on my PC due to the fact I probably have all the software installed in my W8 partition I am likely to use in the near future.

However, will Windows/Office updates affect it's size? Who knows but I have this thread bookmarked a few days after the next 2 patch Tuesdays.

In reply to a post by Pipexer:

You seemed to be disputing that Windows 8 fixes the problem, you have to remember that WinSxS is not an optional part of Windows, it is part of Windows, and the space it uses up can be treated as operating system files.

Mis-reported disk-space not optional? What leaps and bounds Windows has come, that some users will defend such practices.

I thought we covered the whole "misreported" thing with WinSxS before, in TTTS perhaps?

Again without meaning to be cheeky you clearly have a strange obsession with this folder!

In reply to a post by Pipexer:

So indeed by upgrading to Windows 8 you will fix the problem of WinSxS growing astronomically large, however that does not mean it will go away totally - it just means it will stay roughly the same.

No, WinsXs grows over time. Every Win Update makes it bigger; you don't need to install any more programs, but it grows like topsy.

I've kept a log of its size for a couple of years and it has grown from 11GB when I started to 16GB now.

Edited by XRaySpeX (Sun 07-Apr-13 23:56:17)

Yes it grows slightly. Astronomically? No, not at all. - that is not intended behavior and never was.

Edited by Pipexer (Sun 07-Apr-13 23:56:22)

In reply to a post by Pipexer:

Again without meaning to be cheeky you clearly have a strange obsession with this folder!

Not at all, but I'll not let folk fleece me about it, or convince me to upgrade at my coast to avoid it (which I won't anyway).

Mine is 13.8GB on a 320GB drive.

As Pipexer did, I took advantage of the £25 upgrade to Windows 8 (twice), just as I took advantage of the cheap upgrade to Windows 7. But even if you pay a full £100 because you weren't on the ball, is £25 a year a huge price to pay to make your computer run as efficiently as possible?

If you are happy with Windows 7 (or even with XP) then stick with it; but there seems to be little point in doing so and then complaining about the amount of space that a particular folder takes when that is so easily cured. Even if it took 50GB (and, as has already been explained, this is just an illusion) it really wouldn't bother me. That's just a fraction of the free disk space on my Windows machines. If I need more, hard disks are cheap.

In reply to a post by AEP:

If you are happy with Windows 7 (or even with XP) then stick with it; but there seems to be little point in doing so and then complaining about the amount of space that a particular folder takes when that is so easily cured. Even if it took 50GB (and, as has already been explained, this is just an illusion) it really wouldn't bother me. That's just a fraction of the free disk space on my Windows machines. If I need more, hard disks are cheap.

If 7 or 8 had a massive advantage over what I have (to what I do), then I would. I'm happy with Vista. Have been since I started tweaking it. It's pretty stable, and fast for me. I'm led to believe that 7 won't be much of change, and 8 won't have masses of advantage either.

My last OS was XP, but I had a bad setup. Had it been good, I would have skipped Vista and jumped to 7 most likely. As it is, I'll probably keep this one until things get bad. I don't like to cop and change OS installation unless there's a problem, and I prefer to get a new OS when I get a new system.

+50% growth in winsxs folder size is astronomical if you didn't have it planned in your SSD or partition or VM that was sized according to the MS System Requirements.

I don't like to cop and change OS installation unless there's a problem

So the winsx stuff is just an annoyance, not a problem? That's fair enough - I don't know any software that doesn't have the slight annoyance.

I agree with you; stick with whatever works for you. And I agree with Pipexer; if it doesn't work then upgrade.

It would be astronomical, perhaps, if it represented real growth. But as it is illusory, just very small hard links, what does it matter?

In reply to a post by AEP:

It would be astronomical, perhaps, if it represented real growth. But as it is illusory, just very small hard links, what does it matter?

That seems to be a common response from MS, but it isn't small hard links or illusory, according to the Windows Server Core Team who say

The WinSxS folder is the only location that the component is found on the system, all other instances of the files that you see on the system are �projected� by hard linking from the component store. Let me repeat that last point � there is only one instance (or full data copy) of each version of each file in the OS, and that instance is located in the WinSxS folder.

Edit to add stats from a laptop showing with and without hardlinked files :--

C:\Users\Newuser\Downloads>du -u c:\windows\winsxs

Du v1.5 - report directory disk usage
Copyright (C) 2005-2013 Mark Russinovich
Sysinternals - www.sysinternals.com

Files: 53403
Directories: 12316
Size: 12,681,596,028 bytes
Size on disk: 12,859,895,808 bytes


C:\Users\Newuser\Downloads>du c:\windows\winsxs

Du v1.5 - report directory disk usage
Copyright (C) 2005-2013 Mark Russinovich
Sysinternals - www.sysinternals.com

Files: 50642
Directories: 12316
Size: 12,071,577,195 bytes
Size on disk: 12,243,546,112 bytes

Edited by yarwell (Mon 08-Apr-13 10:39:43)

You think it matters which way the hard links go? With or without the winsxs folder the files would still be on the hard disk.

In reply to a post by AEP:

You think it matters which way the hard links go? With or without the winsxs folder the files would still be on the hard disk.

No, obviously, but its better for people to state the truth and not make rubbish up to deflect.

The issue remains why there is so much stuff in there that the system requirements for the OS are exceeded. I don't need a Korean grammar checker, etc etc

So, use another operating system. Simples.

Faciles!

In reply to a post by yarwell:

The issue remains why there is so much stuff in there that the system requirements for the OS are exceeded. I don't need a Korean grammar checker, etc etc

That's the crux of the matter. Not only does winsxs take control of what is on the system out of the hands of techs, MS are closely guarding how it's all put together (does anyone know how to edit it without breaking it?).

Power to MS, and within that might lie potential for privacy issues. If we don't understand what it's doing and how it's working, how can we know if it's safe (not now, but in ten years time).

I would like to be able to chop off as much of the content of my hard drive as possible, regardless of the software maker.

In reply to a post by yarwell:

The issue remains why there is so much stuff in there that the system requirements for the OS are exceeded. I don't need a Korean grammar checker, etc etc

There's a lot of software from numerous companies that install all the languages with no option to only install the languages you want. Some examples include Ccleaner, Defraggler, SuperAntiSpyware, Audacity, FileZilla, Malwarebytes, etc. Whilst there 's no excuse for any of them, including Microsoft, to do this, why single Microsoft out for criticism when lots of other software waste HDD space for unwanted and unnecessary languages?

I don't know whether it's lazy Installer writers or what, but it annoys me far more than the size of the Winsxs folder.

In reply to a post by AEP:

So, use another operating system. Simples.

I do, I just also get to help other people who have run out of hard disk or partition space.

Win7 and 8 appear to have the same architecture issues but less field time / service packs to create the bloat.

When I look at the file list below I feel that lots of old versions are hanging around after SP and other updates :-

316 c:\windows\winsxs\x86_wsdapi_31bf3856ad364e35_6.0.6000.16903_none_bcd054bd502d52a6
317 c:\windows\winsxs\x86_wsdapi_31bf3856ad364e35_6.0.6000.21103_none_bd59c9aa694b25b2
345 c:\windows\winsxs\x86_wsdapi_31bf3856ad364e35_6.0.6001.18306_none_beb994414d512f9c
345 c:\windows\winsxs\x86_wsdapi_31bf3856ad364e35_6.0.6001.22491_none_bedce04e66bc4c2c
349 c:\windows\winsxs\x86_wsdapi_31bf3856ad364e35_6.0.6002.18005_none_c09f05df4a786b69
349 c:\windows\winsxs\x86_wsdapi_31bf3856ad364e35_6.0.6002.18085_none_c048867f4ab94af1
349 c:\windows\winsxs\x86_wsdapi_31bf3856ad364e35_6.0.6002.22194_none_c0c6531463dfed55

I think uninstalling Windows is a pretty difficult option if you don't like the bloat. The rest can be uninstalled.

When I move to a new system, and assuming I do before this one packs up, I'll most likely tinker with winsxs. Just for fun. Not keeping my hopes up though.

I would applaud MS if they had some cleaning utility that could be run to analyse and clean out the unneeded stuff. Or even better, since we have all this cloud-based data nowadays, why not have the necessary stuff on local and everything else remote for when required?

I'd also accept it if they owned up and said "all that disk space is the sacrifice you make to get stability over previous operating systems". If they then allowed the folder to be transferable to another drive or partition, then I would really applaud them.

Win 7&8 both 10 gigs

You're obsessed! If it was in any other folder you wouldn't care!

In reply to a post by Pipexer:

You're obsessed!

This is a thread about winsxs. If I was posting about it in other threads, I might give you some credit for that statement. Given that all the posts should be about it if we are to remain on topic, I suggest you start a non-winsxs thread and see if I post in it (if there is a connection between any such thread and winsxs that warrants it getting a mention, fair enough).

In reply to a post by cheshire_man:

why single Microsoft out for criticism when lots of other software waste HDD space for unwanted and unnecessary languages?

Optional add-on software and its foibles isn't forced on the user in the same way as the OS is. When the OS grows like a cuckoo chick it becomes hard for other things to get in the nest.

In reply to a post by camieabz:

When I move to a new system, and assuming I do before this one packs up, I'll most likely tinker with winsxs. Just for fun. Not keeping my hopes up though.

I would applaud MS if they had some cleaning utility that could be run to analyse and clean out the unneeded stuff.

A guy wrote winsxslite to address this, the links are broken at sites.google.com/site/winsxslite/ but you can hunt down the previous version and some blog entries about using it. Best to try on a spare system or to clean up an image file as an experiment I guess.

7.28 GB on a 120GB SSD on a week old rebuilt system

Ahh, that's quite interesting. I haven't seen the size on newer installations. Any chance you can peek at it's size from time to time? Curious if the increase in size is all things, new applications, or mostly MS updates.

I have reinstalled everything that I had previously, and all updates to date, but will have a look when the next batch come in

Well it has just increased in size following the latest MS updates.

You're correct, why change if it's not broke?

I have Win2K as a print server, WinXP on my PC (10 years old) and Win7 on the laptop. It was Vista but that crashed at least once a week and drivers were a bit of a struggle for some older peripherals, hence upgrade to 7. Only crashed 4 times in 3 years.

All machines work without much thought but seems like a steep learing curve to move to Win8. And before anyone says different, just look at the many posts all over the internet saying that they've added software (sorry apps) to make it more user friendly desktop wise.

Fanboys of Win8 and IE10 will always big-it-up.

A big mistake putting a phone front end on a computer. The first thing I installed was Classic Shell. At least I can now find and run programs. The second was to install Windows Mail. The new laptop is now usable.

In reply to a post by DavidFinbarr:

Win 7&8 both 10 gigs

Since recent updates.
Win 7 10.1
Win 8 10.5

Mine is currently 10.4Gig on a 34Gig partition. This is Win7 Home Premium x64 and in the grand scheme of things, there isn't really a great deal of software installed.
I have somewhere a pretty in depth technical discussion on the SxS (Side by Side) folder including details on how to reduce and manage it's size. I'll try and dig it out for you. In the meantime, have a look here but note the differences between Vista and Seven!!!

Mine is 10.8 GB

In reply to a post by DavidFinbarr:

In reply to a post by DavidFinbarr:

Win 7&8 both 10 gigs

Since recent updates.
Win 7 10.1
Win 8 10.5

Since todays updates
Win 7 10.5 Gigs
Win 8 11.5 Gigs

Edited by deleted (Tue 14-May-13 20:45:22)

I should really give my own update. 16GB in March 2011...16.5GB in May 2013.

Now if we can just get the old / not needed for now stuff onto some static cloud server, it would a great system.

Sorry for not getting back sooner; I missed the link.

Note the last comment after the article.

Ok, who's first?

Just noticed I never came back on this- it's now showing 7.47GB

This is going to be one of the "just let it be whatever size it wants to be" type things. Different versions of DLL's are stored here. I think there is still a bit of work to be done on auto cleaning of this directory by the os provider Microsoft.

I use a product from http://www.disksavvy.com/ from time to time to check what is being stored on my hard disks

Edited by iand (Fri 24-May-13 17:50:22)

Win 7 64-bit 8.29GB on a 465GB partition

Surely it's best such things are stored so your programs just work?

If they didn't you'd be panning MS for lack of proper application support.

Linux will never be a mass market desktop OS because it requires an interested person to set it up and maintain it (I dabble with Ubuntu myself)

As for privacy I think Google is far more of a menace on that score.

agree.!!!

9.88 GB on 80 GB drive

Don't know if you have come across this:

http://www.howtogeek.com/174705/how-to-reduce-the-si...

Mine, on a Win7 pro is 8.92 GB and according to Properties has 12,510 Folders and 50,126 File. My C: drive only contains Windows and Programs and is 60 GB SS Drive.

What is concerning is that with all file display options enabled, the Freespace 9.2 GB is less than 60 GB minus the total of files displayed

Cheers!

3.62 Gb on Win 8.1

I just managed to clear out 991Mb out of mine using the instructions in the link I posted on the 31/10 and mine now shows:
7.46 GB (8,016,494,592 bytes)
47,279 Files, 11,767 Folders
on a 120Gb SSD

Here's the link again in case anyone missed it:

http://www.howtogeek.com/174705/how-to-reduce-the-si...

Thanks for reposting that link, I've just regained 4.38GB !!!

Cheers!

Wow! glad to help