Take the 2-minute tour ×
Super User is a question and answer site for computer enthusiasts and power users. It's 100% free, no registration required.

In Windows 7, libraries were introduced that combined multiple "physical" directories into one so that multiple folders could be browsed as one "logical" folder. I want to do a similar thing for my desktop files.

The issue stems from this Java bug, which apparently uses the parent directory of the desktop as the "home" directory, which is incorrect. I would like to store my personal files in a separate partition, and the OS and all program files on the main partition.

If I have my desktop folder on my personal files partition, however, Java programs that use the "user.home" property end up storing their files in my personal files partition instead.

I would like to solve this by setting my "default" desktop folder to C:\Users\username\Desktop folder and having my actual desktop files stored in D:\Personal\Desktop. This way, programs that dump their files in my "home" directory do it in C:\Users\username instead of D:\Personal.

Is there any way to accomplish this? Alternatively, does a patch exist that keeps the [HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Explorer\Shell Folders\Desktop] registry key intact but still make Windows think that the folder is elsewhere?

share|improve this question
You are not going to be able to change how where Windows stores the files on the desktop and NOT change the location of the Profile itself. Both are not supported by Microsoft. –  Ramhound Dec 30 '13 at 12:16
I'm not sure I understand what you're saying, do you mean that I can't do both at the same time or that both are impossible? I know for sure that you can move the location of the desktop folder (it's currently on my D: drive); what do you mean by changing the location of the profile? –  Andrew Sun Dec 30 '13 at 13:32
use a sym-link? –  Raystafarian Dec 30 '13 at 15:04
Using symlinks would mean that I have to create one for each directory that is created; is there a more elegant way to solve this problem? (If all else fails, I guess that wouldn't be that bad; I only have like 5 or 6 things that would need to be symlinked anyways) –  Andrew Sun Dec 31 '13 at 8:03

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.