Free Ubuntu CDs shipped to your door.

D.K.

Hi, Sorry but I don't know.
I did have to instal winimage to extract it.

D.

bat999

OK
The file that you downloaded will have the name
Ubuntu-7.04-desktop-i386.iso
(Or something similar)
It will be one file approx 697MB size.
This is the one file that you have to burn to CD.
Don't do anything with it, don't extract anything.
When you burn the CD, your burning software (Nero or whatever) should give you an option 'Burn CD image' (Or something similar).
Use this option.
Don't burn it as a data disc or as a music disc. It's got to be an image.

CHR15

You didn't really need to ectract it.

Nero would burn the .iso straight to a bootable disk.

Boot with the CD in the drive. I am sure it gives you (the old version did anyway) an option to have a play before commiting yourself to a complete install


edit:

doh! too slow

D.K.

Many thanks,
Will try again
DK

D.K.

Oh no! I downloaded it again and just get the message that windows cannot open this file and needs to know what created it.I also tried to drag and drop onto Nero but it wasn't having it either.
I dunno, I'm doing my best? Whats an image CD? Is that a video CD or a DVD?
I hate it when these things get the better of me!!!
Thanks guys for helping anyway.
D

fjeer

Use Nero and choose 'Burn CD Image' or 'Burn ISO Image' or something. Basically a cd image is an entire cd captured into one file, and you shouldn't be extracting it or similar.

If you're really having problems, please go for the free cd offer I posted!

And as for not having an objective view, and speaking hearsay, to whoever said that - I use Windows at work (not through choice) and have been using Windows since I was 10-11 years old - I am now 25. I have used Suse Linux, Slackware Linux, Debian Linux, Redhat Linux along side that since the age of about 13. I have a very balanced view of both Operating Systems.

It is my opinion however that Linux is better. Sure, there are a number of products which don't work on it, but that is the fault of those products not catering for this market, rather than the other way around. Remember this entire OS was developed for free - there is no laziness or unwillingness to write software going on here. It is the other party's fault.

Lastly the comment about Windows XP being faster. Never. Load up Windows XP with as much software (and nearly 3 years use) as my Ubuntu Linux installation, and tell me it runs as fast. Except don't, because I wont believe you :P

Check this bloke out
:money:
If he had the faintest idea what Linux was, he'd use it.

bat999

fjeer wrote: »

Check this bloke out
:money:
If he had the faintest idea what Linux was, he'd use it.

rofpmsl :rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

Hi DK
Windows doesn't need to open that iso file.
Don't do anything to it.
Keep it just the way it was downloaded.
The 697MB size is so that it just fits nicely onto a 700MB disc.
You need to find out how Nero works.
Look for a help file or Google for it.
You've got to find an option such as 'Burn ISO CD image' or similar.
Not a video CD or a DVD.

There's a page here with instructions, but it uses a different package.
If you can't figure out Nero then perhaps try following these instructions instead:https://help.ubuntu.com/community/BurningIsoHowto
:cool:

everythingblogcast

The OP only wants to get Thanked so he gets the thanked points up, by posting stuff that have been posted before.

superscaper

fjeer wrote: »

And as for not having an objective view, and speaking hearsay, to whoever said that - I use Windows at work (not through choice) and have been using Windows since I was 10-11 years old - I am now 25. I have used Suse Linux, Slackware Linux, Debian Linux, Redhat Linux along side that since the age of about 13. I have a very balanced view of both Operating Systems.

Is it Vista? If you had an objective view of operating systems there would be no need for hyperbole and incorrectly using the term legacy for Vista. I've mentioned before on these boards what my favourite OS (it isn't windows) is but I'd NEVER describe another OS that's only just come out as "legacy" no matter how much I didn't like it. And for someone using a seven year old pc, it's a bit contradictory describing something else as "legacy" in a negative way. And although your experience of the two OSs may be balanced, that doesn't mean your view is balanced. We all have our prejudices. I know I have mine and I tend to admit them up front or qualify my statements to take account of that. Ubuntu should be good enough to stand on its own without "negative campaigning" against its' competitors otherwise you just dilute the message of how good it is.

Grimswold_Tightwad

OK, although I haven't used Vista, I have used MS DOS / Windows products since I stopped using the BBC Model B in the 80s ! I use XP at work and I have machines running 2000 and 98SE (for older packages I occasionally want to use) at home. I'm certainly not anti MS.

.....However, I am also a recent convert to Linux (Ubuntu). The whole Linux / Open Source deal is bargain of the century if you want to do certain things (and you don't want to do certain other things). The things you can (easily) do well with Ubuntu are Web Surfing, Email, Image Manipulation and office stuff. Things you may have problems with are running most contemporary computer games and a lot of professional type software.


The basic Ubuntu install will give you the excellent Firefox ( also available for Windows), GIMP (an image manipulator / paint package Adobe (ish) kinda thing. You also get Open Office, that allows to to read Word documents and save in the usual array of formats (including .doc). Aside from the Word Processor you get an Excel clone and all the other stuff. You will also get a viable email package, but you can easily download the excellent Thunderbird. In fact downloading and installing new software is an absolute breeze with Ubuntu. You just use a simple Add / Remove tool. You have access to a vast repository of Open Source software – no CD's / DVD's all done on line ( you REALLY need broadband though !)


The thing is, this is all free !!


You have to be reasonable with the specification of the computer that you run this on. It IS fair to say it will run better on a slightly lower spec machine than XP (and by all accounts Vista ). What will really slow it down though is a lack of RAM. I run 1GB on my PC, but I suspect you could get away with half that – Much less and you may notice a reduction in performance. RAM is not that expensive now though.


The other thing to watch with Linux is hardware support. It is a lot easier to research which hardware is supported, and construct a PC around that, than have a battle to make the thing work at install time. If you are working on a shoe string, you will often find slightly older computer hardware on eBay for not a lot, or even Freecycle for nowt !


http://www.freecycle.org/


Ubuntu is certainly one of the most “friendly” Linux Distributions, but you may need to put in more work to get everything working smoothly than you would expect to with a MS product. The good news though is that there is a fabulous Ubuntu “community” and you can invariably find an easy to do “Howto” for most things (at least I did !).


In summary, if you are not adverse to a bit of hardware research and are willing to do a little bit of PC “tinkering”, Ubuntu Linux can provide you with a an extremely cheap machine that is stable and very, very resilient to virus's and malware.


Take a look here :-http://www.ubuntu.com/

Personally I will not be returning to MS products for domestic use, but I will have to use MS products for my work related stuff for the foreseeable future.

- Horses for courses !