Problems Downoading 64bit 3.2

I'm having a lot of problems downloading the 64bit version of Core 3.2. I've tried it from all four sources on a couple of different machines, different browsers, and OS's and I can't get one where the MD5 matches. Today I've been using DownThemAll to see if that helps, but they still don't match. Other distros from other sources are downloading fine (I've downloaded over a dozen in the past couple of days) so I seriously doubt it is a problem on my end. Is there any way to check to see if the MD5 listed on the site of f535bf4aa7b4d167be1363d137b7d95e is correct or not? And is it possible to verify that the files listed from http://zorin-os.com/3free.html aren't corrupted on your end?

I need to get a copy of 3.2 due to hardware problems with any distros based on Ubuntu 10.10 or later. Releases up thru 10.04 work perfectly, but starting with 10.10 there is a change in the way they access NTFS drives and partitions that simply doesn't work well with some Intel SATA controllers that have RAID capabilities, even with RAID disabled (using just SATA or in IDE mode), if it works at all. While I can get the later versions to see and mount NTFS drives/partitions if I'm willing to work at it long enough, but that doesn't help the LiveCDs as you have to download updates to do it, something that isn't always possible up here where I am. Many of the places I go don't have Internet Access, making it impossible to download the necessary updates to gain access to NTFS on these systems.

I have never been able to find out what Ubuntu screwed up starting with 10.10 that causes this to happen, and no one at Ubuntu cares enough to even attempt to help so I'm forced to stick with 10.04 based releases until someone figures out what is causing it.

Any help would be appreciated.

Hi,

one thing I never ever do is worry about the checksum, I do however burn the disks at the slowest possible speed which nearly always gives me a good disk.

All I can suggest is you use a re-writable disk and see if it runs, worrying about whether a couple of bits are missing will just mean you may never get it installed!!.

Thats all the advice I have!!.

If you want professional advice from Ubuntu, you are going to have to pay for it!!.

Regards Wolfman

Thanks for replying, but it doesn't address the issue. I'm not having a problem with the burns. None of the disks I've burned of other distros have any problems as long as the MD5's match, only the ones from Zoryn. Plus, burning wouldn't come into play when creating a LiveUSB stick, again which work fine with any of the other distros.

As for burning at the slowest speed possible, that is essentially outdated information. It used to be true back when we were using slow, single core processors with small amounts of ram and slower hard drives. Modern systems (as in Dual Core systems built in the last 8 years or so) with reasonable specs, a decent burner, and good quality disks like Verbaturms with AZO Dye, Falcons, Taiyo Yuden, Sony's from Japan, and a few others will actually provide better quality burns when burned at their RATED speed. At the very worst with a low quality burner, burning them at half speed is the slowest that should be attempted. Burning them at the slowest possible speed and you'll end up with more PI Errors and PI Failures than you will when burning them at their proper rated speed. I'm not the only one who knows this to be true either. Since I'm burning these disks on a 4GHz Intel Quad Core processor, 8 gig of ram, 120Mb/s + drives, high quality burners with MediaTek chipsets, using 16x Verbatum +R Disks with the Azo Dye that isn't the problem. Tests are showing them to have a burn quality of 98 or higher (out of 100) with only a couple of PI Failures, none of which are higher than 1, and that is at 16x (48x for CD's). You can't get a much better burn than that. Burning DVDs at 6x (the slowest speed supported by the burners with +R and -R disks) on my burners and you end up with a Quality Score in the upper 80s with a lot of PI Failures of 3 (meaning that the data is marginal) and difficulty reading the information on the disk..

Considering that none of the disks burned using this method and hardware of ISO's from Ubuntu, Fedora, Mandriva, Pinguy, Knoppix, Mint, PartitionMagic, Clonezilla, Microsoft, or anyplace else where the MD5's match I seriously doubt it is an issue with the burn quality, especially when I'm installing from a USB stick, not a DVD. It's much more likely to be either an incorrect MD5 listed or a corrupted ISO image. Considering that I downloaded over 20 ISOs in the past week, all of them matched their MD5s, and all of them install (or run from a LiveUSB) just fine tells me that the chances of it being on my end is essentially nill. I did have a problem with downloading the ISO from AVLinux, but we were able to sort that out as they were making a change on their end while I was trying to download. I was able to get it successfully.

On the other hand, if you have an old, slow system with minimal ram, a cheap low quality burner, use essentially junk disks like Memowrecks and other generic brands from Wally World, Buy More, etc., and run numerous apps in the background and try to watch movies on your computer while burning you disks then burning at the slowest possible speed MIGHT make a difference, but the disks would still have way too many PI Errors and Failures to be considered a GOOD disk. At best, it would be just above the coaster range, something that I only run into when testing new blanks or burners.

As for the help with the Ubuntu issue, I'm not specifically asking that here. That was primarily included so people would know why I'm looking for an older release instead of one of the newer ones. If someone happened to know the answer and was willing to share it, then great. But that wasn't the intent of my request.

But if this is the level of support provided by this forum, and the fact that it took over 12 hours for the thread to even appear on it leads me to believe that Zorin is not going to be a distro that I will want to use or recommend. I have other issues with it that I was going to address in another thread, but I'm not sure that it will be worth my time to do so. I'll stick with distros that are better supported, and forums that are friendlier, timelier, and more friendly.