On 7 April 2011 14:49, scoundrel50a wrote:
> Burnt disc, then rebooted, but wasnt recognised by computer and windows
> started. Do I need to do anything else. Read the instructions Popey gave but
> it says computer should recognise the disc and start.
>
Hello, usually when you start your computer
On 07/04/11 14:49, scoundrel50a wrote:
Burnt disc, then rebooted, but wasnt recognised by computer and windows
started. Do I need to do anything else. Read the instructions Popey gave
but it says computer should recognise the disc and start.
Try pressing F12 on the Acer startup screen, it shou
On 07/04/11 13:41, scoundrel50a wrote:
Thanks everybody. I was thinking of adding some more RAM, to make it
faster.
I will give it a try with the 64 bit.
To be honest I'm not sure extra RAM will make it much faster, not unless
you're running shed loads at once. I have a 2Ghz Core 2 Duo and
On 07/04/11 15:55, Lee Williams wrote:
On 07/04/2011 15:28, Dave Hanson wrote:
On 07/04/11 14:04, ubuntu-uk-requ...@lists.ubuntu.com wrote:
On 7 April 2011 13:54, Lee Williams wrote:
> It's not a problem installing 32bit on a machine with> ~3.5GB ram... rather
> the memory after the ~3.5GB
On 07/04/2011 15:28, Dave Hanson wrote:
On 07/04/11 14:04, ubuntu-uk-requ...@lists.ubuntu.com wrote:
On 7 April 2011 13:54, Lee Williams wrote:
> It's not a problem installing 32bit on a machine with> ~3.5GB ram... rather
> the memory after the ~3.5GB or so is not "dedicated to system resou
On 07/04/11 14:04, ubuntu-uk-requ...@lists.ubuntu.com wrote:
On 7 April 2011 13:54, Lee Williams wrote:
> It's not a problem installing 32bit on a machine with> ~3.5GB ram... rather
> the memory after the ~3.5GB or so is not "dedicated to system resources";
> rather, system resources have u
scoundrel50a wrote:
Burnt disc, then rebooted, but wasnt recognised by computer and windows
started. Do I need to do anything else. Read the instructions Popey gave
but it says computer should recognise the disc and start.
Ah yeah, that page doesn't mention computers where the CD isn't the
fir
Burnt disc, then rebooted, but wasnt recognised by computer and windows
started. Do I need to do anything else. Read the instructions Popey gave
but it says computer should recognise the disc and start.
On 07/04/2011 14:31, Lee Williams wrote:
On 07/04/2011 14:20, Avi Greenbury wrote:
scoun
On 07/04/2011 14:20, Avi Greenbury wrote:
scoundrel50a wrote:
One question though, I am having to create an ubuntu disc from a Windows
computer, and not done that before. What is the best software to make an
Ubuntu disc?
I used to use InfraRecorder, which appears to still exist:
http://infrar
On Thu, 2011-04-07 at 13:28 +0100, Steve Flynn wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 1:18 PM, scoundrel50a wrote:
> > Hi, for now, instead of getting a Slate, I found a computer, that will be
> > better for what I need at the moment.
I'm holding out for the new Commodore 64 :)
Dianne
--
ubuntu-uk@l
scoundrel50a wrote:
One question though, I am having to create an ubuntu disc from a Windows
computer, and not done that before. What is the best software to make an
Ubuntu disc?
I used to use InfraRecorder, which appears to still exist:
http://infrarecorder.sourceforge.net
--
Avi.
--
ubuntu
On 7 April 2011 14:13, scoundrel50a wrote:
> One question though, I am having to create an ubuntu disc from a Windows
> computer, and not done that before. What is the best software to make an
> Ubuntu disc?
The ubuntu.com website has instructions on the download page.
http://www.ubuntu.com/desk
On 07/04/2011 14:05, Avi Greenbury wrote:
scoundrel50a wrote:
now I'm unsure. If I increased the RAM would that be a problem with
installing 32 on here? I'm glad I asked now.
Nope, no problems.
A 32-bit processor can only address about 3.5GB of ram natively,
64-bit processors can address som
scoundrel50a wrote:
now I'm unsure. If I increased the RAM would that be a problem with
installing 32 on here? I'm glad I asked now.
Nope, no problems.
A 32-bit processor can only address about 3.5GB of ram natively, 64-bit
processors can address some incomprehensibly large amount of memory.
On 7 April 2011 13:54, Lee Williams wrote:
> It's not a problem installing 32bit on a machine with > ~3.5GB ram... rather
> the memory after the ~3.5GB or so is not "dedicated to system resources";
> rather, system resources have used up the remaining memory *addresses*, so
> the memory cannot be
On 7 April 2011 13:50, scoundrel50a wrote:
> Which version should I install, Would it be worth installed the beta
> version, or Macverick?
>
I wouldn't recommend anyone installs Natty (the development/beta
release) now, unless they were very competent with Linux/Ubuntu and
they're happy work arou
On Thu, 2011-04-07 at 13:50 +0100, scoundrel50a wrote:
> On 07/04/2011 13:46, Dave Morley wrote:
> > On Thu, 2011-04-07 at 13:44 +0100, Dave Morley wrote:
> >> On Thu, 2011-04-07 at 13:28 +0100, Steve Flynn wrote:
> >>> On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 1:18 PM, scoundrel50a
> >>> wrote:
> Hi, for now,
On 07/04/2011 13:46, scoundrel50a wrote:
Hi Avi and Dave,
now I'm unsure. If I increased the RAM would that be a problem with
installing 32 on here? I'm glad I asked now.
I think if its better to install 32 bit, I would rather that.
On 07/04/2011 13:35, Avi Greenbury wrote:
scoundrel50a
On 7 April 2011 13:46, scoundrel50a wrote:
> now I'm unsure. If I increased the RAM would that be a problem with
> installing 32 on here? I'm glad I asked now.
It would not be a "problem". 32-bit Ubuntu can address lots of memory,
just like 64-bit can.
> I think if its better to install 32 bit,
On 07/04/2011 13:46, Dave Morley wrote:
On Thu, 2011-04-07 at 13:44 +0100, Dave Morley wrote:
On Thu, 2011-04-07 at 13:28 +0100, Steve Flynn wrote:
On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 1:18 PM, scoundrel50a wrote:
Hi, for now, instead of getting a Slate, I found a computer, that will be
better for what I n
Hi Avi and Dave,
now I'm unsure. If I increased the RAM would that be a problem with
installing 32 on here? I'm glad I asked now.
I think if its better to install 32 bit, I would rather that.
On 07/04/2011 13:35, Avi Greenbury wrote:
scoundrel50a wrote:
I want to install Ubuntu, but i'm a
On Thu, 2011-04-07 at 13:44 +0100, Dave Morley wrote:
> On Thu, 2011-04-07 at 13:28 +0100, Steve Flynn wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 1:18 PM, scoundrel50a wrote:
> > > Hi, for now, instead of getting a Slate, I found a computer, that will be
> > > better for what I need at the moment.
> > >
>
On Thu, 2011-04-07 at 13:28 +0100, Steve Flynn wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 1:18 PM, scoundrel50a wrote:
> > Hi, for now, instead of getting a Slate, I found a computer, that will be
> > better for what I need at the moment.
> >
> > The specs are:-
> >
> > Acer Aspire 5736Z
> > Pentium Dual Co
On Thu, 2011-04-07 at 13:28 +0100, Steve Flynn wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 1:18 PM, scoundrel50a wrote:
> > Hi, for now, instead of getting a Slate, I found a computer, that will be
> > better for what I need at the moment.
> >
> > The specs are:-
> >
> > Acer Aspire 5736Z
> > Pentium Dual Cor
Thanks everybody. I was thinking of adding some more RAM, to make it
faster.
I will give it a try with the 64 bit.
Thanks again.
On 07/04/2011 13:28, Steve Flynn wrote:
On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 1:18 PM, scoundrel50a wrote:
Hi, for now, instead of getting a Slate, I found a computer, that wil
scoundrel50a wrote:
I want to install Ubuntu, but i'm a bit concerned about the fact its
64bit, and having read a few peoples problems when trying to install.
Just wondered would there be any problems with the installation with
this computer?
Back in the day, Adobe Flash on amd64 was iffy, but
On 07/04/2011 13:18, scoundrel50a wrote:
Hi, for now, instead of getting a Slate, I found a computer, that will
be better for what I need at the moment.
The specs are:-
Acer Aspire 5736Z
Pentium Dual Core CPU
T4500 @ 2.30 GHz
RAM 3.00 GB
64 bit
Windows 7 Premium
I want to install Ubuntu, but i
Yep, I'd second that view too, I've installed 64bit with no issues
before now on a lower spec machine too.
But don't think there's anything too bad going with 32bit.
Lee.
On 07/04/2011 13:27, bod...@googlemail.com wrote:
I doubt it. The specs look fine to me. Only thing is that unless you pla
On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 1:18 PM, scoundrel50a wrote:
> Hi, for now, instead of getting a Slate, I found a computer, that will be
> better for what I need at the moment.
>
> The specs are:-
>
> Acer Aspire 5736Z
> Pentium Dual Core CPU
> T4500 @ 2.30 GHz
> RAM 3.00 GB
> 64 bit
> Windows 7 Premium
>
I doubt it. The specs look fine to me. Only thing is that unless you plan on
adding more than an extra 1gb of RAM, you won't see much benefit running 64bit
instead of 32
Bodsda
Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device
-Original Message-
From: scoundrel50a
Sender: ubuntu-uk-boun...@lis
Hi, for now, instead of getting a Slate, I found a computer, that will
be better for what I need at the moment.
The specs are:-
Acer Aspire 5736Z
Pentium Dual Core CPU
T4500 @ 2.30 GHz
RAM 3.00 GB
64 bit
Windows 7 Premium
I want to install Ubuntu, but i'm a bit concerned about the fact its
64
31 matches
Mail list logo
