I abandoned all of the recommended ways you often read about on the Web to handle burning ISOs except two.
1) Sadly, I've found that burning to a DVD/BluRay works most reliably from Windows 10 Pro 1809 or better as the OEM features of the player/burner are all available.
2) The most reliable way to "burn" an ISO to a USB is to use disk-writer to write the ISO to a bootable FAT32 stick (for me from Debian).
And... Yes, though I hesitate to say it, I have never liked the way the Ubuntu LTS installer hybrid ISO works. On some hardware it will throw errors that are not the actual error, confusing to new users, errors that indicate the ISO was not accurately burned when in fact that is not the problem. Usually it is actually a read from compression error, on old hardware too slow of RAM buffering and memory threading, and on new hardware too fast, and/or caused by OEM secure memory sectors and miss-reads and sometimes 32bit firmware. For the majority of users the Ubuntu ISO method of installing is not a problem, but it is a problem for some. And in all honesty Linux Lite has been the most problematic for me as well, and I honestly don't know specifically why. I suspect it depends on the hardware at both ends of the process.
Far and away the Debian net install hybrid non-free ISO is the most reliable and the most easily accessible from the terminal and thus repairable after installing aptitude, but this is not something that can be easily acheived with Ubuntu given the packaging system and install heirarchy.
Perhaps this is something the community needs to look at, and make unique to Linux Lite, but unfortunately the vector of hardware nascence is rising so steeply these days that Ubuntu's development cycle must by necessity already assume a frenetically torrid pace.
On the web the general way recommended to fix a failed install is to re-install. The problem with that praxis in Ubuntu is that there is no guarantee the installer will not crash again, and the fact is the problem may be something simple. Ubuntu server used to be simple to install but things have been added to telemetry now that will fail some secuirty layers when trying to install it. What a good idea for Ubuntu. Dumb in my opinion. In the case of LTS the real issue for Ubuntu may be in the heirarchy of the installation (the order in which things are installed from the ISO) that inhibits user intervention on broken partial installs, (which is a questionable maybe even lazy practice given that a hybrid ISO is already being used) Then again Ubuntu is trying to make things simple for new users, and perhaps that is for the best.
TC
1) Sadly, I've found that burning to a DVD/BluRay works most reliably from Windows 10 Pro 1809 or better as the OEM features of the player/burner are all available.
2) The most reliable way to "burn" an ISO to a USB is to use disk-writer to write the ISO to a bootable FAT32 stick (for me from Debian).
And... Yes, though I hesitate to say it, I have never liked the way the Ubuntu LTS installer hybrid ISO works. On some hardware it will throw errors that are not the actual error, confusing to new users, errors that indicate the ISO was not accurately burned when in fact that is not the problem. Usually it is actually a read from compression error, on old hardware too slow of RAM buffering and memory threading, and on new hardware too fast, and/or caused by OEM secure memory sectors and miss-reads and sometimes 32bit firmware. For the majority of users the Ubuntu ISO method of installing is not a problem, but it is a problem for some. And in all honesty Linux Lite has been the most problematic for me as well, and I honestly don't know specifically why. I suspect it depends on the hardware at both ends of the process.
Far and away the Debian net install hybrid non-free ISO is the most reliable and the most easily accessible from the terminal and thus repairable after installing aptitude, but this is not something that can be easily acheived with Ubuntu given the packaging system and install heirarchy.
Perhaps this is something the community needs to look at, and make unique to Linux Lite, but unfortunately the vector of hardware nascence is rising so steeply these days that Ubuntu's development cycle must by necessity already assume a frenetically torrid pace.
On the web the general way recommended to fix a failed install is to re-install. The problem with that praxis in Ubuntu is that there is no guarantee the installer will not crash again, and the fact is the problem may be something simple. Ubuntu server used to be simple to install but things have been added to telemetry now that will fail some secuirty layers when trying to install it. What a good idea for Ubuntu. Dumb in my opinion. In the case of LTS the real issue for Ubuntu may be in the heirarchy of the installation (the order in which things are installed from the ISO) that inhibits user intervention on broken partial installs, (which is a questionable maybe even lazy practice given that a hybrid ISO is already being used) Then again Ubuntu is trying to make things simple for new users, and perhaps that is for the best.
TC
All opinions expressed and all advice given by Trinidad Cruz on this forum are his responsibility alone and do not necessarily reflect the views or methods of the developers of Linux Lite. He is a citizen of the United States where it is acceptable to occasionally be uninformed and inept as long as you pay your taxes.