>>Your testing in interesting. See my response regarding caching. This may be part of the reason you are seeing these results.
>
>Hidy,
>
>I'm not so sure. I believe that the time stamps are stored in the FAT. I don't think it would be practical to cache information going there, especially if the handle had been closed. Seems like asking for trouble.


That's *if* the drive is using FAT. I don't know how it would work on NTFS, Novell, etc.