How to get rid of the write-protection garbage?

[John Doe]

I just copied a custom program folder to Program Files. Then I tried
to update one of the files in that folder. Windows 8 file permissions
garbage reared its ugly head. So I figured a work around would be to
delete the folder, to update that file, and then again copy it to the
Program Files folder. But of course, the windows 8 file permissions
garbage won't let that folder be deleted now. So what am I supposed
to do?

Thanks.

[..winston]

Take Permission of the folder ?

http://www.google.com/search?q=Windows+7+Folder+Permissions

http://www.google.com/search?q=Cant+access+Programs+Files+in+Windows+7

--
....winston
msft mvp


"John Doe" wrote in message ...

I just copied a custom program folder to Program Files. Then I tried
to update one of the files in that folder. Windows 8 file permissions
garbage reared its ugly head. So I figured a work around would be to
delete the folder, to update that file, and then again copy it to the
Program Files folder. But of course, the windows 8 file permissions
garbage won't let that folder be deleted now. So what am I supposed
to do?

Thanks.

[John Doe]

Found it on the "Stack Overflow" site. It's not permissions, it's
ownership. Apparently the "Trusted Installer" screwed up my access
to the Program Files folder. Of course I don't know whether and what
bad side effects there might be by changing it. It might also revert
at any time, I guess, like maybe on the next program installation. I
had seen mention of that installer thing, but was too busy looking
for the permissions and UAC stuff. What a PITA.


"..winston" > wrote:

> Take Permission of the folder ?
>
> http://www.google.com/search?q=Windows+7+Folder+Permissions
>
> http://www.google.com/search?
q=Cant+access+Programs+Files+in+Windows+7
>

[..winston]

That's why I provided the link about 'Permissions'
- Win7 Permissions are a good start to understand Win8 Permissions and 'Ownership' since:

"The **owner** of the object controls how permissions are set on the object and to whom permissions are granted.

Trusted Installer is the default 'Owner' of the Program Files folder
i.e. Are you certain Trusted Installer was the cause as opposed to copying an unnamed custom program folder to Program Files
contrary to how Trusted Installer expected it to happen ?

--
....winston
msft mvp


"John Doe" wrote in message ...

Found it on the "Stack Overflow" site. It's not permissions, it's
ownership. Apparently the "Trusted Installer" screwed up my access
to the Program Files folder. Of course I don't know whether and what
bad side effects there might be by changing it. It might also revert
at any time, I guess, like maybe on the next program installation. I
had seen mention of that installer thing, but was too busy looking
for the permissions and UAC stuff. What a PITA.


"..winston" > wrote:

> Take Permission of the folder ?
>
> http://www.google.com/search?q=Windows+7+Folder+Permissions
>
> http://www.google.com/search?
q=Cant+access+Programs+Files+in+Windows+7
>

[John Doe]

"..winston" <winstonmvp gmail.com> wrote:

> Are you certain Trusted Installer was the cause as opposed to
> copying an unnamed custom program folder to Program Files
> contrary to how Trusted Installer expected it to happen ?

It's my computer. It belongs to me. I own it. Every time it does
something that I don't like, it is to blame.

[Rob]

On 5/01/2013 5:40 PM, John Doe wrote:
> "..winston" <winstonmvp gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Are you certain Trusted Installer was the cause as opposed to
>> copying an unnamed custom program folder to Program Files
>> contrary to how Trusted Installer expected it to happen ?
>
> It's my computer. It belongs to me. I own it. Every time it does
> something that I don't like, it is to blame.
>


http://www.howtogeek.com/howto/windows-vista/add-take-ownership-to-explorer-right-click-menu-in-vista/

get the small program from here. have a read of the instructions - this
is what I use to regain ownership, saves buggering around. yes it does
work with W8

[Gene E. Bloch[_2_]]

On Sat, 5 Jan 2013 06:40:25 +0000 (UTC), John Doe wrote:

> "..winston" <winstonmvp gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Are you certain Trusted Installer was the cause as opposed to
>> copying an unnamed custom program folder to Program Files
>> contrary to how Trusted Installer expected it to happen ?
>
> It's my computer. It belongs to me. I own it. Every time it does
> something that I don't like, it is to blame.

You're lucky. Unlike me, you never make a mistake.

--
Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)

[John Doe]

"Gene E. Bloch" <not-me other.invalid> wrote:

> John Doe wrote:

>> It's my computer. Every time it does something that I don't
>> like, it is to blame.
>
> You're lucky. Unlike me, you never make a mistake.

Only in the context of dealing with my computer, that is correct.

If a computer had a sixth grader's comprehension, power users would
have little or no trouble getting a computer to do anything we want
them to do (that they're capable of doing). That the computer is too
stupid to understand what I want it to do is the computer's fault.
But of course, feel free to have your own method of dealing with a
stupid computer.

[..winston]

Oh I see...then it must be the result of not owning the o/s.

--
....winston
msft mvp


"John Doe" wrote in message ...

"..winston" <winstonmvp gmail.com> wrote:

> Are you certain Trusted Installer was the cause as opposed to
> copying an unnamed custom program folder to Program Files
> contrary to how Trusted Installer expected it to happen ?

It's my computer. It belongs to me. I own it. Every time it does
something that I don't like, it is to blame.

[John Doe]

Technology will go nowhere slowly if the thinking devices that
people have are owned and controlled by somebody else. The
advancement of high technology is not going to happen that way.

"..winston" <winstonmvp gmail.com> wrote:

> Path: eternal-september.org!mx04.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
> From: "..winston" >
> Newsgroups: alt.comp.os.windows-8
> Subject: Re: How to get rid of the write-protection garbage?
> Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2013 20:05:15 -0500
> Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
> Lines: 2
> Message-ID: >
> References: > > > > >
> Mime-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
> Injection-Date: Sun, 6 Jan 2013 01:04:39 +0000 (UTC)
> Injection-Info: mx04.eternal-september.org; posting-host="e80892f176577ff4e380298d26602899"; logging-data="9942"; "; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18n+546UYk8KyKd+e/GFp9zsisrTrl6piQ="
> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V16.4.3505.912
> In-Reply-To: >
> X-Newsreader: Microsoft Windows Live Mail 16.4.3505.912
> Importance: Normal
> Cancel-Lock: sha1:74KSjXeKWMnm6ynhVWu3ZrGBvJI=
> X-Priority: 3
> X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
> Xref: mx04.eternal-september.org alt.comp.os.windows-8:2498
>
> Oh I see...then it must be the result of not owning the o/s.
>
> --
> ...winston
> msft mvp
>
>
> "John Doe" wrote in message ...
>
> "..winston" <winstonmvp gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Are you certain Trusted Installer was the cause as opposed to
>> copying an unnamed custom program folder to Program Files
>> contrary to how Trusted Installer expected it to happen ?
>
> It's my computer. It belongs to me. I own it. Every time it does
> something that I don't like, it is to blame.
>
>
>

[Gordonbp]

On 06/01/13 16:31, John Doe wrote:
> Spam
>
Spam? Not at all.

Just showing you how YOU can take control of your machine without it
being controlled by a large corporation...

[Nil[_2_]]

On 06 Jan 2013, Gordonbp > wrote in
alt.comp.os.windows-8:

> Spam? Not at all.
>
> Just showing you how YOU can take control of your machine without it
> being controlled by a large corporation...

If nothing else, it certainly gives you fewer excuses to whine about
it.

Of course, just as you can learn to deal with Linux's security and
permissions architecture, so can you with Windows's. Some people, like
the OP, would rather just bitch about it.

[Paul]

Gordonbp wrote:
> On 06/01/13 16:31, John Doe wrote:
>> Spam
>>
> Spam? Not at all.
>
> Just showing you how YOU can take control of your machine without it
> being controlled by a large corporation...

I'd agree with that sentiment up to a point, but Canonical/Ubuntu
is not exactly the poster boy for user choice. Sorry. They'd
"embrace and extend" given a chance, and would be just as
tyrannical as the next company. They've already shown
they don't care what their customer base thinks.

(Mint wins this year)
http://www.tuxradar.com/content/best-linux-distro-2012

If you were to select a Gentoo distro, that would be an
example of user choice. There, I could eject "PulseAudio"
from all the built software. I could run KDE or Gnome.
I can choose to include or exclude support for various
movie formats, all by changing build options. The price you
pay for that, is ~12 hours of compile time to build up
the environment you want on the machine. Gentoo builds from
source (which is fine in my book). This is one time
you'll want that 6-core 12-thread processor :-)

It's not nearly as convenient as downloading a Ubuntu
disc, but it's a hell of a lot easier than trying to
find a workaround for the latest Canonical decision/blunder.
It's why people bail from Ubuntu and load up Mint or
something else. Because they just don't like what
they're losing from release to release.

I used to load and test new Linux distros in my VM environment,
but that's kinda ground to a halt, since some genius decided
to probe my VM environment, incorrectly conclude I was
running Hyper-V (when I'm not), disable regular Linux
IDE drivers on the assumption Hyper-V drivers (provided by the VM)
are available, when they're not. And then, my LiveCD can't
access any hard drives. Virtually dead in the water. Funny
as hell... and a waste of my download time. And I'm not
changing VMs or loading addition VM software, to solve
such stupidity. If there was a boot time option to turn
off the behavior, fine, but I haven't been able to find
such yet. A similar thing happened when Linux got into
the business of probing VM environments (the kernel would
crash doing that). Such behavior is really entirely unnecessary.
Just ignore the environment I provide, assume you're "running
on a damn computer", and get on with it. Stop screwing around!

So yeah, all OSes have their problems, and you trade off one
set of issues for another. Whether it's walled gardens or
incompetent design decisions, there's always something
waiting for you, to bite you.

Paul

[Ken Blake[_4_]]

On Sun, 06 Jan 2013 17:44:13 +0000, Gordonbp >
wrote:

> On 06/01/13 16:31, John Doe wrote:
> > Spam
> >
> Spam? Not at all.
>
> Just showing you how YOU can take control of your machine without it
> being controlled by a large corporation...


I'm not a fan of Linux in any form--Ubuntu or anything else.
Nevertheless, I completely agree with you; your recommending something
that you prefer for whatever reason, is *not* spam.

--
Ken Blake

[Gene E. Bloch[_2_]]

On Sun, 6 Jan 2013 00:01:50 +0000 (UTC), John Doe wrote:

> "Gene E. Bloch" <not-me other.invalid> wrote:
>
>> John Doe wrote:
>
>>> It's my computer. Every time it does something that I don't
>>> like, it is to blame.
>>
>> You're lucky. Unlike me, you never make a mistake.
>
> Only in the context of dealing with my computer, that is correct.
>
> If a computer had a sixth grader's comprehension, power users would
> have little or no trouble getting a computer to do anything we want
> them to do (that they're capable of doing). That the computer is too
> stupid to understand what I want it to do is the computer's fault.
> But of course, feel free to have your own method of dealing with a
> stupid computer.

I have tried understanding what I am doing. It works very well.

--
Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)

[Zaphod Beeblebrox]

On Sun, 6 Jan 2013 16:47:31 -0800, "Gene E. Bloch" <not-
> wrote in article
>...
>
> On Sun, 6 Jan 2013 00:01:50 +0000 (UTC), John Doe wrote:
>
> > "Gene E. Bloch" <not-me other.invalid> wrote:
> >
> >> John Doe wrote:
> >
> >>> It's my computer. Every time it does something that I don't
> >>> like, it is to blame.
> >>
> >> You're lucky. Unlike me, you never make a mistake.
> >
> > Only in the context of dealing with my computer, that is correct.
> >
> > If a computer had a sixth grader's comprehension, power users would
> > have little or no trouble getting a computer to do anything we want
> > them to do (that they're capable of doing). That the computer is too
> > stupid to understand what I want it to do is the computer's fault.
> > But of course, feel free to have your own method of dealing with a
> > stupid computer.
>
> I have tried understanding what I am doing. It works very well.

+1

--
Zaphod

Vell, Zaphod's just zis guy, ya know? - Gag Halfrunt