ThunderPeel2001

As I said in my first post, the best solution is for you to fix your Permissions problem. It's just a little fiddly, because it doesn't work quite as intuitively as it should. If you explain your situation on SuperUser.com, I'm pretty sure you'll get someone who will take the time and show you how to do it. Edit: Here's how I think you need to do it, from the top of my head: Right click properties on the folder you moved over. "Security" tab. Click "Advanced". Click "Change Permissions". Click "Add". Type the name of your current User in the white box and click "Check Names". If you don't get an error, click OK. (You can get your current "User" name by clicking on the user icon at the top of the Start menu.) In the "Allow" column tick: Traverse/Execute, List/Read, Read Attributes, Read Extended Attributes, Read Permissions. Make sure "Apply these options to Folders, Subfolders, and Files" is at the top. Click OK. Edit edit: Post a screenshot of the advanced permissions window when you're done, if you're still having problems afterwards. That should work... But, like I said, ask on SuperUser.com.

No worries. If you can learn more about Windows permissions, you could add yourself to that folder, and then you'll be fine. Maybe ask a question about it at www.SuperUser.com? You might get someone to post a step-by-step guide for you. (It's been too long for me to recall everything you need to do, sadly.)

Steam is working fine because it's running at Administrator level... meaning it's ignoring the permissions on the folder. Try changing the permissions in the way you claim UAC is stopping you -- Even with UAC disabled you'll get the same problem, because it's got nothing to do with UAC, it's just how Windows implements permissions. Check it for yourself: First quit Steam, then... 1. Disable UAC. Try making the permissions changes on the folder. Result: See! Even with UAC is disabled, your permission changes won't go through. 2. Enable UAC to FULL WHACK (which is where it should be). Then run Steam as an Administrator. (To do this, go to the Steam icon. Right click > Properties > Compatibility Tab > Tick "Run this program as an administrator" > Click YES to confirm.) Result: Steam works again... even with UAC to to max. Conclusion: UAC isn't your problem.

*sigh* (Sorry. It's just a little frustrating to have someone who didn't know what UAC was 30 mins ago start trying to tell me how it works. Lol. I'm sure I've done the same myself, though.) Check it for yourself: You've got UAC disabled at the moment, yes? So why not try and make the "read-only" change now? Is UAC preventing it from going through?

In the Fight Club novel it claims that projectionists would often snip frames from their favourite sex scenes, and so as prints would do the round across the country, the sex scenes would be getting progressively shorter and shorter.

Er... Close, but you're not quite there yet. For a start: UAC doesn't "restrict" your actions in any way.

That's more myths from bad journos. A Peter Bright points out: http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/news/2010/11/newly-discovered-windows-kernel-flaw-bypasses-uac.ars In other words, all those "UAC Exploit Found" news articles equate to "New Virus Not Stopped By Anti-Virus Software". Does that mean you just go ahead and disable your anti-virus software? Of course not. It just means there's a known hole at the moment, but until that's fixed, the vast majority of exploits are still being stopped. Just because anti-virus software isn't 100% effective in every single situation doesn't mean that anti-virus software is worthless, and UAC is the same.

When you have UAC turned off, every single application you run has complete control over your OS. Every file, every folder, every drive, you registry, your OS, etc. etc. Question is: Why should Firefox have the ability to erase your registry or format your harddrive when you just want it to allow you to go online and check your emails? Actually, why should any app you run have that ability? 99.999% you're doing user business, not admin business. How many times a week do you need to change your Windows settings? Maybe once or twice, when you're installing some new software... That's it. So why give every application (and I mean every application) complete free reign over your computer? With UAC turned off, that little handy app that you've installed based on a forum recommendation, but that's been developed by some unknown guy in his bedroom, can do what ever it wants to your computer... You just have to trust that it won't. With UAC turned on, as soon as any application wants to start changing things on your computer, it has to ask your permission first. Windows detects a call to do something that only an admin should do, and stops it in its tracks. This does mean that you get an annoying pop-up, asking your permission. But it also means that if you're not expecting the app you're running to suddenly want to change your system settings, you can click "No", and stop it in its tracks. The only counter-argument to UAC is the fact that people sometimes get complacent and just start clicking "OK" without thinking about it. I personally see this as a problem between the keyboard and chair, though. I certainly don't think it's a good idea to leave your system completely exposed 100% of the time, when that sort of access is only needed 00.001% of the time. Why your Windows 7 UAC setting should be increased from its default, not decreased: http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/news/2009/02/the-curious-tale-of-windows-7s-uac.ars A beginner guide: http://www.7tutorials.com/uac-why-you-should-never-turn-it-off

Hey, that's probably a really secure solution... Your OS can't get a virus if it's been deleted

"I solved a problem I didn't understand by removing the security features of my OS - Win! :tup:" Top tip: NEVER turn off UAC. Especially if you don't understand what it's for. The reason Windows 7 isn't liking your folders copied straight from your old OS -- and why are you copying your Program Files folder over? (le sigh) -- is because they belong to a different user. And another user (i.e. your current one on your new computer) can't get access to delete the files there... for security reasons. Windows ownership is a bit annoying, it's true, but a better solution would be to give your current user R/W rights to the folder and all subfolders. Another solution would be to allow Steam to be installed from scratch, and then download all your games again. The worst solution would be to permanently disable the most important security feature Windows has, just so you can play Mass Effect.

It was on the cusp of being locked forever. Interesting how many people are the same, and how many are different.

Apparently the new Risk is pretty good: http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2012/01/22/cardboard-children-risk-legacy/ Also: Be careful Googling this game. Apparently there are some very big spoilers.

It's getting to that time of year again: FOTY.cx Oscars! When all the good movies are released, and there are no Transformers sequels. Favourite films/performances over the past year?

Wow. I'm amazed this could be the last LucasFilm. He didn't even write or direct it. You'd think he'd go out with more of a bang.

That seems unlikely, given that we're in different countries. What colour was it?

Yes... thank you. (Note to self: I don't remember Rodi pointing out the obvious before. Hmm )

While we're all deciding who Rodi is, I was just surprised to learn that LucasFilm's first non-franchise movie since the last time they tried (and failed) to make box office success, is finally here! (Well, in the US/Canada.) But boy, what a terrible poster...

Are you sure?

Well all I can tell you is that it entertained a packed cinema in Liverpool, filled with people of all ages. One of the teens behind me, just before the film started, said, "I bet this is shit". And yet it enraptured the entire audience. Nobody was talking or using their phone, and the everything I overheard was positive (including from the teens behind me). Is it a flawless film? No. Is it the best film of the year? I don't know. Did I enjoy it? Yes. Is it a charming and lovely movie? Yes, it is. Did it manage to hold the attention of a modern audience with only music and black and white visuals? Somehow it did. If anything it shows the power of good story, and how Michael Bay visuals are not necessary, even in this day and age. Just go and see it, and don't expect the greatest film ever made. Just see if it can hold your attention with no spoken dialogue and black and white visuals.

Well let's see what Ben thinks.

Nah, I don't buy into that. There's plenty of movies that the critics have raved about that the general public isn't afraid to say, "it's shit!". I genuinely enjoyed it. It is, as Rodi said, charming and lovely. I think Ben might need to see it again, as I'm wondering if his expectations were too high.

Half price this weekend only: http://www.gog.com/en/gamecard/little_big_adventure

Well, you can't control what your heart feels, right?

Wow, I've nearly watched the whole thing... I watched the whole damn thing. Oddly enough the fight scenes at the end are the weakest bits, but the whole thing is still hugely enjoyable.

That took me a second... Brilliant