Hello hope you can help this computer was bought from comet back in 2008, And about a year later I put Ubuntu 12.04 on i, So after I received it as my second PC decided to use update manager to update , but it requires a comet password.
When run in vista I am the administrator also when booted in safe mode no passwords are required
Hope it not ghost image in the recovery section of HDD :‘( :’( :‘( :’( :‘( :’( :‘( :’( 
I’m confused what the problem is here, what is it you are trying to achieve?
I have a laptop for university and now in possession of a old 2008 desktop with vista and installed by me ages ago Ubuntu 12.04 as a WUBI file but I cannot upgrade as it stops me.
Comet left some sort of admin password required.
Windows and also booted in safe mode did not require a password
Any ideas ?
installed by me ages ago Ubuntu 12.04 as a WUBI file but I cannot upgrade as it stops me.If you have installed Ubuntu by yourselves then you must have set the administrators password too. I doubt this has anything to do with comet. You could try updating in the Terminal: This will ask you to enter your password.
sudo apt-get update
then
sudo apt-get upgrade
This will update all the packages.
My advice would be to get rid of the WUBI install and do a proper dual boot.
Done some digging and apparently it was comet who sold the desktop as new when it was a display model? perhaps I knew the password years ago but not now.
This action has been done more than a few times
As I do not need Vista will erase HDD of all data contained and leave it clean just for Linux.
size=10pt]now what version 14.04 or mint 17.02?[/size][/color]
Laptop win 10 OK and as I have ancillary software to do with university will not touch it
My pick would be with Mint 17.2 Cinnamon. You could also try it with Mate.
To SeZo was thinking mint .
A clean install .
No win on desktop resource hungry crap
What’s the spec on this Vista machine? CPU, RAM?
Yeah, you should be fine with Mint 17.2 Cinnamon 
Up to you if you go for 32 or 64 bit, personally I’d go for 32 bit as you don’t need the RAM addressing capacity of 64 bit, and 64 bit is more “wasteful” with RAM - it tends to “spread out” a bit more, using more than the 32 bit version would. Although CPU performance would be slightly quicker with 64 bit, it’d be a much bigger performance impact if you ran out of RAM (something less likely to happen on 32 bit)
upgraded my old desktop so this one be a doddle ram/chip/psu/monitor