Installing Kubuntu first time; disks show swapped?

[bobbicat]

when I want to boot to Windows (which I haven't done since mid-2013, and don't expect to do in future)

It is many years since I let windows anywhere near my hardware, the last time really was the LAST time. I still had a deal of material I'd collected over the years in the windows area. It seemed safe enough and I could access it indirectly from Linux. I happened to log in to windows which suggested it could correct a minor error it had encountered. Muggins here let it do its monstrous work. In only a very few minutes it completely chewed up the filing system and later after much effort with recovery programs I had to shrug my shoulders and accept that the majority of it would never be back. I never trusted windows with my files after that episode.
...but my point is, if you have something you value there, put a backup of it somewhere outside of windows clutches. Its too late once your data is ground up. Then all you have left is the wish that you had the the foresight to put your files somewhere safe.


*addition*
If you want to see how a version of Kubuntu/Ubuntu/Xubuntu or any of the other flavours, looks on your system, make a pen drive or DVD with the Live version and run it from there. You should get a pretty good idea without needing to go to an actual install. Although if you have disk space an install is no big deal, it can be accomplished quickly with no trouble

[Silent Observer]

Good advice, bobbicat -- though I've been planning to repair the MBR on the Windows drive that got overwritten when I selected the wrong device while trying to fix Grub a couple days ago, since I can then get Windows to start (long enough to download a Linux install and burn a CD or USB) by changing the BIOS specified boot order, even if the drive that holds my Linux installs and their bootloader is completely trashed and I don't have access to another computer (like the one directly below my main one). Then again, I might leave that for when/if I need it; it only takes five minutes with the Windows install CD in hand.

Maybe, next time I need to replace the SATA drive (which seem to have a lifetime of 1-3 years -- my IDE drive is already eight years old or so, and one of my externals is around twelve -- and yes, a 120 GB drive was a little pricey in 2002), I'll format it ext4 and just copy the files, and never mind keeping Windows bootable. XP will be so out of date by then that starting it on a net-connected computer would be like opening the front door and posting a sign about "rare coin collection on display" -- and then going down to Starbuck's for a cup of coffee (and don't even think about the Win98 left over on my other two machines).

[bobbicat]

Is this the answer?

Further to the above, the following might be the answer you need for your kernel panic boot up problem.
After I also had a Live boot problem, I discovered a solution on the Ubuntu Forums. It might also work for you.

I think we already realize that we need to boot from the UEFI version of the Live USB.
That is fine but what follows is crucial but not obvious.

You must ensure that in your 'uefi bios' boot list all non-uefi devices are moved to the bottom of the list and none are before the device you are attempting to boot from.

I followed that on my machine and the problems evaporated.
I think up until then, somehow luckily, no non-uefi devices had got in front of my boot device and I saw no problems. When a non-uefi device did get in front, those weird errors had me totally perplexed. It was not easy to spot.
I had tried all sorts of things before finding that Ubuntu Forum post.
The link is here if you want to take a look:
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?p=11842855

[Silent Observer]

You must ensure that in your 'uefi bios' boot list all non-uefi devices are moved to the bottom of the list and none are before the device you are attempting to boot from.

Probably valid advice, but I'm pretty sure my machine is too old to have UEFI -- I replaced the motherboard five years ago, and it wasn't at all a state of the art board (I bought what I could afford, after a sudden failure); I've upgraded RAM and CPU since, but the BIOS is dated 2007 or some such. Further, I don't knowingly have any EFI devices installed -- one SATA hard disk, one IDE (the latter significantly older than the motherboard) -- and don't recall even noticing if there was a UEFI version of the iso.

[bobbicat]

There isn't a separate version of the .iso, but UEFI has to use the 64bit version. Your machine's capability should be recognized and installed accordingly. You are right, of course, what I have said does not apply to your PC.
Nevertheless, your symptoms did seem similar to those I encountered. Perhaps we were both falling foul of the same recognition process. I'm not sufficiently knowledgeable to be able to understand what was going on.
I suppose its a case of 'all's well that ends well' . We both ended up with a successful install, so who is grumbling?