AlmaLinux Reviews

My main use case for AlmaLinux is enterprise server environments, hosting different applications, databases, and our charging workloads. I use it where I need a stable, secure, RHEL compatible OS with long-term support.

In an enterprise environment, I have used AlmaLinux mainly for application and telecom servers. We host telecom applications and services that require RHEL compatible OS, running databases and middleware components. We are using it for monitoring and logging custom servers, managing servers with SystemD, SSH, FirewallD, SELinux, and package management using DNF. We perform patching, security updates, troubleshooting, and system health checks with this. The main reason is its RHEL compatibility, stability, security, and long-term support, which makes it very suitable for production environments.

I also use AlmaLinux for system administration and production support, including OS patching and upgrades, troubleshooting performance and service issues, managing users and permissions, checking logs, configuring networking and security, and automating routine tasks with shell scripts.

The key features of AlmaLinux I would highlight are the RHEL compatibility and application and package compatibility with RHEL. Stability and reliability are also important points as it is well-suited for production servers. Long-term support is valuable because it is suitable for enterprise environments. Security, including SELinux, FirewallD, and regular security updates, is a key important point. It is open source and free with no subscription cost for the OS, and it has easy package management as it uses DNF and RPM. It provides a good enterprise ecosystem that works well with common monitoring, virtualization, cloud, and automation tools.

I rely mostly on stability, security, and RHEL compatibility in my day-to-day work. I frequently use DNF for patching, systemctl for service management, SELinux and FirewallD for security, and standard Linux troubleshooting tools to manage the charging nodes. One area I would see improved is simplifying some enterprise administration and troubleshooting workflows, especially through better centralized management and monitoring tool servers. Overall, AlmaLinux works very well for production environments.

It has helped mainly in reducing OS licensing cost while maintaining a stable RHEL compatible platform. It has also given us good flexibility for production workloads, security patching, system administration, and troubleshooting. From an operational perspective, the familiar RHEL ecosystem makes it very easy for our team to deploy, maintain, and troubleshoot servers consistently.

The biggest outcome has been cost-efficiency and easier operation. Since AlmaLinux is free and RHEL compatible, we can avoid OS licensing costs while keeping the same familiar administration model. It also saves time because the team can use the same tools, commands, packages, and troubleshooting approach we already know from the RHEL ecosystem. It improves productivity, especially during patching, deployments, and incident troubleshooting.

AlmaLinux is already very strong, but it could be improved in a few areas. Better centralized management and monitoring, easier major version upgrades, and more enterprise-focused automation tools would make administration simpler. Having more integrated tools for patch management, compliance, configuration management, and troubleshooting could reduce manual work for system administrators.

The main area for improvement is enterprise management. Better centralized patching, monitoring, compliance, and automation would make it easier to manage large-scale deployments. I would also like to see smoother and more predictable major version upgrades, especially for systems with third-party dependencies. AlmaLinux is already improving in this area through ELEvate and its migration tools.

I have been using AlmaLinux for four years.

AlmaLinux is a stable, production-grade enterprise Linux distribution. AlmaLinux aims for binary compatibility with RHEL, so applications and kernel modules designed for RHEL are intended to work on AlmaLinux. It appears very stable.

AlmaLinux has good scalability and is well-suited for both small deployments and large enterprise environments. Horizontal scaling is available, allowing us to deploy AlmaLinux across many servers and VMs and scale workloads by adding nodes. Cloud scalability is also supported, as it works well on major cloud platforms and supports common cloud technologies. AlmaLinux can serve as a reliable base OS for container hosts and Kubernetes infrastructure.

AlmaLinux customer support is good, but its model is different from RHEL. It is strong and active with forums, chat, mailing lists, GitHub, Wiki, and community troubleshooting. For commercial support, enterprise-level SLAs, and dedicated assistance, AlmaLinux lists third-party commercial providers such as TuxCare, Cybertrust, and Fujitsu. For technical issues, the community is very useful for installation, configuration, migration, and troubleshooting, but response time can vary sometimes because community resources are volunteer-supported.

Previously, we used CentOS, but after CentOS Linux reached its end of life, we moved to AlmaLinux. The main reason was to get a stable, free, RHEL-compatible platform without having to make major changes to our existing applications and operational processes. The migration path was also relatively straightforward.

My experience has been quite positive from a cost perspective. AlmaLinux itself is free and open-source, so there is no OS licensing fee. The main costs are infrastructure, such as AWS compute, storage, and network, and any optional commercial support we choose. From a setup perspective, deployment is straightforward because it follows the RHEL ecosystem, so there is very little additional migration cost for the team.

We saw ROI mainly through reduced licensing costs and lower migration and administration effort. Since AlmaLinux is free and RHEL compatible, we avoided the OS subscription cost while continuing to use the same familiar tools and operational processes. We also saved engineering time because the team did not need significant retraining or changes to our existing Linux procedures. I do not have an exact percentage for the savings, but the main measurable benefits were licensing cost reduction and reduced operational effort.

AlmaLinux has helped mainly in reducing OS licensing cost while maintaining a stable RHEL compatible platform. From an operational perspective, the familiar RHEL ecosystem makes it very easy for our team to deploy, maintain, and troubleshoot servers consistently. There are no additional OS licensing fees, reducing setup cost considerably.

We evaluated a few options, mainly Rocky Linux, Oracle Linux, RHEL, and Ubuntu. We compared them based on RHEL compatibility, stability, support life cycle, licensing cost, and migration effort. AlmaLinux was a good fit because it gave us a stable, RHEL-compatible platform without the commercial licensing.

I would advise organizations to consider AlmaLinux if they want a stable, secure, and cost-effective enterprise Linux platform with a strong RHEL compatibility. Before migrating, they should validate applications compatibility, test their workloads in a non-production environment, and evaluate their requirements for commercial support. Overall, it is a very strong option for organizations looking to reduce licensing costs without compromising on reliability and scalability. I would rate this product a nine out of ten.

My main use case for AlmaLinux is based on my recent hands-on experience with AlmaLinux 9 for OpenStack deployment, and I am happy to share my feedback on PeerSpot.

To give a quick example of how I am using AlmaLinux for my OpenStack deployment, here is a brief review based on my recent production deployment experience. It involves deploying a full OpenStack Yoga environment for a private cloud setup, which is my personal project for practicing. The initial attempts on Red Hat distribution faced compatibility and subscription repository configuration hurdles, but I found solutions to switch to AlmaLinux 9.6, which offered perfect compatibility with Packstack without the licensing overhead.

There are key wins from my side: AlmaLinux 9 has zero subscription friction, direct access to the latest patches, and smooth installation of OpenStack Keystone, Nova, Neutron, and Horizon via Packstack. Moreover, stable OVS networking and floating IP configuration is very easy for me when using AlmaLinux, making it a reliable and highly recommended option for teams needing an enterprise-grade Red Hat compatible workflow without the subscription cost.

After struggling with various Linux distributions for almost seven days, mainly dealing with missing tools while installing network components like Neutron in OpenStack, I turned to AlmaLinux. It was then that I discovered that full OpenStack installation with AlmaLinux is highly compatible. Eventually, I successfully configured the full OpenStack platform, which is something my interviewer board also accepted.

My deployment of AlmaLinux starts locally to connect servers, requiring multiple nodes. Initially, I test in a local environment before transitioning toward a public cloud setup, which is a practice session for me. I also suggest to our public cloud team that they utilize AlmaLinux, as I find it quite comfortable.

Regarding AlmaLinux's scalability, I find that it scales well in both vertical and horizontal dimensions due to its one-to-one compatibility with Red Hat and an enterprise-grade kernel. For vertical scaling, adding more CPU, RAM, or storage is seamless, and tools like tune allow for quick performance profiling. Horizontally, while using AWS, I successfully scaled applications significantly during traffic spikes without OS-related issues, and I managed to add new compute nodes effortlessly within the OpenStack cluster.

The best features AlmaLinux offers include zero-subscription friction and direct access to the latest patches, which I think are essential. Additionally, it also provides up-to-date packages and stable versions that are very useful for me.

When I say direct access to the latest patches, it has greatly benefited my projects by being absolutely hassle-free. In contrast to Red Hat, where I had to configure the Yum server for updates or deal with subscriptions, AlmaLinux allows a far simpler process without the complexities involved.

At this moment, AlmaLinux is a very open platform. It not only includes the latest security patches but also integrates very recent AI technologies alongside the direct patches that help harden the server.

I have noticed several positive impacts of using AlmaLinux on my organization and personal projects. Trying multiple distributions like CentOS, Red Hat, and Ubuntu for my personal OpenStack installation revealed how complex it can be to set up. I find AlmaLinux to be reliable, providing the latest patches on a secure platform. Many people suggest AlmaLinux 9 on public platforms for its excellent features, and I benefited from the step-by-step configuration provided, leading to the acceptance of my project.

I follow the documentation for AlmaLinux, which I believe could be more extensive for enterprise setups. My primary use case remains deploying private cloud infrastructure using OpenStack Yoga, thus suggesting improvements to cater to specific cloud instances like AWS Graviton or Azure NVMe.

Driver or kernel updates for new hardware or cloud instances like AWS Graviton or Azure NVMe tend to arrive a little later in AlmaLinux than they do in the Red Hat distribution. Therefore, I suggest that faster releases of cloud-optimized images and updated hardware drivers could enhance AlmaLinux's competitiveness. Additionally, I find it sometimes difficult to find answers on forums due to the community not being as large as that of Red Hat or CentOS. My suggestion is to create an active forum or Q&A session where developers can directly address user problems, growing the community and providing optional enterprise support tiers for large organizations.

Additionally, I have continued to consider improvements. For server administration and language runtime management, I encountered conflicts on production servers with older and newer versions of tools such as Python and Node.js. Simplifying the application space management would reduce the friction in multi-language development environments. Moreover, including more pre-configured or auto-remediation scripts like CIS Benchmark or STIG compliance would be immensely helpful for enterprise security hardening.

My experience with AlmaLinux spans almost two years.

While I do not yet use AlmaLinux in a production capacity, my use case for my blogging activity has demonstrated its stability. Official blogs also verify that the stable version of AlmaLinux is acceptable for production purposes.

I have not utilized customer support for AlmaLinux as of yet, mainly relying on public resources and the official documentation.

Prior to using AlmaLinux, we utilized Red Hat, which posed significant financial challenges due to its subscription model and complexity. Comparatively, AlmaLinux serves as a very suitable alternative, matching the Red Hat environment with lower costs.

I follow the documentation for AlmaLinux, which I believe could be more extensive for enterprise setups. My primary use case remains deploying private cloud infrastructure using OpenStack Yoga, thus suggesting improvements to cater to specific cloud instances like AWS Graviton or Azure NVMe.

In terms of return on investment from using AlmaLinux, I maintain that since we use the free version, we have saved significantly and have encountered fewer security risks. If the AlmaLinux team announces that the latest version complies with CIS benchmarks and security protocols, I will continue to endorse AlmaLinux.

Currently, we have not experienced pricing with AlmaLinux, as I have used the free version so far. However, when we move to the production environment, I am suggesting that we implement AlmaLinux to improve our performance metrics.

Before settling on AlmaLinux, I evaluated other options while testing in a local environment, especially for students encountering financial constraints. Given its resemblance to Red Hat and CentOS, I recommended AlmaLinux as the best solution due to its free nature.

On a scale of one to ten, I would rate AlmaLinux at 8.5 overall.

The reason I chose 8.5 out of 10 stems from my perspective as a user focused on OpenStack deployments. Despite being subscription-free and reliable, I find some complexities in the documentation and troubleshooting guides which are not as comprehensive as Red Hat's. There is also a lack of 24x7 support, leading to a reliance on community assistance, and while the migration tools are useful, they do raise warnings with legacy systems. Additionally, hardware support is occasionally slow for newer driver versions, which is why I score it as I do.

My advice for others considering AlmaLinux is that it is a fantastic product and a reliable alternative to Red Hat, matching its kernel. I recommend that students use AlmaLinux for local deployments and testing packages, as it is secure and dependable. I gave AlmaLinux an overall rating of 8.5 out of 10.

AlmaLinux is primarily used for running stable server workloads and enterprise Linux environments. Since it is binary compatible with Red Hat Enterprise Linux, it provides a reliable platform for hosting applications, web servers, databases, and infrastructure services without subscription costs.

I deployed a web application environment consisting of Apache, a database server, and automation scripts using AlmaLinux. The RHEL compatibility allowed me to follow enterprise Linux best practices while avoiding licensing costs. I also used AlmaLinux for Kubernetes and container-related labs because it provides a stable operating system foundation similar to enterprise Linux environments.

AlmaLinux offers several standout features that I have observed during my usage, including long-term stability, RHEL compatibility, being free and open source, providing regular security updates, and community governance.

The most valuable feature for me is RHEL compatibility. It allows for the use of the same tools, packages, and administration practices found in enterprise Linux environments while avoiding subscription costs. This is especially useful for learning, testing, and infrastructure deployments. RHEL compatibility reduces troubleshooting and configuration effort because extensive documentation and a large knowledge base are available. Administrators can follow well-established enterprise Linux procedures, reducing the likelihood of configuration errors.

AlmaLinux has delivered a significant positive impact on my organization through cost savings while maintaining enterprise-level reliability. AlmaLinux provides a stable server platform without operating system licensing fees, allowing organizations to allocate resources elsewhere.

The main improvements I would suggest are expanding enterprise awareness, growing the commercial support ecosystem, and providing additional onboarding and migration resources. AlmaLinux itself is stable, secure, and reliable. Most opportunities are around ecosystem growth and user adoption rather than technical limitations. The biggest improvements I would like to see include stronger enterprise ecosystem support, more commercial support options, additional migration tools, and increased industry recognition.

While AlmaLinux does not provide the same vendor-backed support experience as Red Hat Enterprise Linux, the available resources are more than sufficient for many organizations and administrators. Overall, AlmaLinux is highly rated, but the ecosystem and support aspects could be expanded.

I have been using AlmaLinux for more than six to seven months.

AlmaLinux is highly stable and represents one of its strongest qualities. It is designed for enterprise workloads and follows a long-term support model, making it suitable for production servers, databases, web applications, virtualization platforms, and cloud environments.

AlmaLinux scales very well and can support everything from a small virtual machine to large enterprise deployments. It works effectively in physical, virtualized, cloud, containerized, and clustered environments. I would rate AlmaLinux highly for scalability.

AlmaLinux offers strong community support and excellent documentation. While it does not provide the same vendor-backed support experience as Red Hat Enterprise Linux, the available resources are more than sufficient for many organizations and administrators.

I did not use any other solution before AlmaLinux. I did not evaluate any other options. I was completely focused on AlmaLinux and had my eye on AlmaLinux, so there were no alternative options considered.

The return on investment comes primarily from lower operating system costs, operational consistency, and reduced administrative effort. Even without exact metrics, the impact is reflected in cost savings from licensing, faster deployments through RHEL compatibility, and a stable platform that supports reliable operations. The clearest measurable benefit is avoiding operating system subscription costs while maintaining enterprise Linux compatibility and stability.

AlmaLinux is highly rated overall. I would advise you to seriously consider AlmaLinux if you are looking for a stable, enterprise-grade Linux distribution without operating system licensing costs. It provides excellent compatibility with the Red Hat ecosystem, making it a strong choice for servers, cloud deployments, virtualization, containers, and enterprise applications.

AlmaLinux scales very well and can support everything from a small virtual machine to large enterprise deployments. It works effectively in physical, virtualized, cloud, containerized, and clustered environments. I would rate AlmaLinux highly for scalability.

AlmaLinux's role is seen as enabling governance and security rather than directly governing AI. Its enterprise security features, long-term support, auditing capabilities, and stable operating environment help organizations run AI workloads securely and in a controlled manner. AI governance itself is typically implemented through higher-level tools, policies, and processes.

I would not rate AlmaLinux on AI output accuracy because that is determined by the AI application itself. However, I would rate AlmaLinux highly for reliability as a platform for AI workloads because it provides enterprise-grade stability, security, and long-term support.

Based on my experience using AlmaLinux, I do not believe there are any other improvements needed. I would give this product a rating of nine out of ten.

My usual use cases for AlmaLinux include when I need to spin up a server. For example, when I am working on an AWS project, a cloud project, and I need to connect my EC2 instance, a virtual machine, on my cloud in real time to a Linux environment. I quickly go to AlmaLinux to spin up that server and then I begin to carry out my task on the environment.

What I found about AlmaLinux to be very useful in my day-to-day activities is the control and isolation that it provides for applications. When you're working on AlmaLinux, it gives you isolated security that does not affect my host computer. The security that I enjoy in AlmaLinux allows me to perform any security tasks that I need. For example, if I need to access vulnerable websites or applications, it gives me this controlled environment, similar to a sandbox, providing me with a controlled room to do what I need to do without affecting my host operating system.

AlmaLinux helps me enforce security policies in my organization. When we need to partition our networking segment security on different layers, AlmaLinux comes to the rescue. When I have Linux tasks to perform, I go to AlmaLinux, which provides that standalone Linux operating system for me. This does not affect my Windows operating system in any way. It enables me to carry out all tasks that I need to do, all shell tasks, conduct my Bash scripting, my Python scripting, and helps me carry out those automation and scripting languages that I need.

AlmaLinux helps me to have dual operating systems on my host computer. I am able to run my Windows operating system seamlessly and at the same time run my Linux environment seamlessly.

Everything boils down to the isolation, networking, and segmentation that AlmaLinux provides. In terms of security, configuration, and Linux tasks that you need to run, as a system administrator, you would most likely work with Linux more than half of the time. Running on AlmaLinux infrastructure helps you own your Linux skills, and that is how I would describe it. It gives you ownership.

Using AlmaLinux was a condition to do my job, and right afterwards, I have been enjoying it. I have stuck with it and never had a reason to go back. I enjoyed working with it, and even this morning, I had some tasks that I had to spin up on AlmaLinux.

What I found about AlmaLinux to be very useful in my day-to-day activities is the control and isolation that it provides for applications. When you're working on AlmaLinux, it gives you isolated security that does not affect my host computer. The security that I enjoy in AlmaLinux allows me to perform any security tasks that I need. For example, if I need to access vulnerable websites or applications, it gives me this controlled environment, similar to a sandbox, providing me with a controlled room to do what I need to do without affecting my host operating system.

For governance, AlmaLinux by default enables one to comply. If you're building an application and AlmaLinux is your host operating system, it helps you comply with industry standards because it will force you to set up your firewall, create your routing rules, and all of that. These are what ensure governance.

In terms of resource allocation, AlmaLinux requires you to have at least ten gigabytes of RAM storage and four gigabytes of CPU allocation. For my system, I consider it a mid-level system and not a very high-performing laptop. I would say it can impact IT professionals like myself who have low or medium-scale laptops, suggesting a reduction in resource allocation for CPU and RAM.

I have been working with AlmaLinux since last year.

AlmaLinux is 100% stable and reliable for every task that I have had to carry out on it.

Regarding how scalable AlmaLinux is, I would rate it over 80%.

I have not had a reason to communicate with the technical support of AlmaLinux because everything has been smooth for me.

I initially started with Ubuntu and then migrated to Kali Linux. From Kali Linux, I went into AlmaLinux because of a project I was currently working on for a client who specifically indicated that I use AlmaLinux for that project. That was how I transitioned from Kali Linux to AlmaLinux.

I set up AlmaLinux on my machine myself. I went to the official AlmaLinux website, found the ISO image file that I needed, and verified the checksum file on my PowerShell before I installed it to ensure that I installed the verified and authenticated ISO image type.

I found the initial setup process to be straightforward. I documented the entire setup on LinkedIn and could share the link if needed.

I utilized the whitepaper on AlmaLinux from their official website to set up and configure AlmaLinux last year.

AlmaLinux impacts an organization by helping you understand when there are errors or flaws that you need to mitigate by providing you the logs. The errors and logs are found when you initiate it, helping in communication because you are able to read your log files and communicate with your colleagues about what I have seen on the logs, stating we have to fix specific issues.

I am not aware of the pricing and licensing of AlmaLinux because I installed it on my hypervisor for free.

AlmaLinux's compatibility with RHEL packages does enhance my mitigation needs. I run AlmaLinux on a VMware Workstation Pro, which provides a fast experience for me. There are no roadblocks because I have already versioned my firewalls and created a configured firewall that helps me patch security.

Significantly, AlmaLinux has a huge impact on my package management strategy with DNF because of the isolation that it provides for me.

For enhancing the documentation, I do not see any reason to do so because every bit of information that I needed was contained in it. I followed it, and the entire process for the setup was not difficult at all for me, personally. I would rate this product an 8 overall.

My main use case for AlmaLinux involves using it for web servers, mail servers, and local development servers, and also for Docker. My web servers use AlmaLinux to serve websites to inform my customers using Apache, MySQL, or PostgreSQL, and Docker is being run on different application servers, hosting a myriad of applications.

The best features AlmaLinux offers include long-term support, which was the main reason I switched from Ubuntu to CentOS. I was shocked when they killed support for CentOS 8 within a year, even though they had promised about nine years. I am very glad AlmaLinux stepped up and still provides that level of support.

The long-term support provided by AlmaLinux helps my business by ensuring that we do not have to renew our servers every four to five years. Migrations can be quite labor-intensive, so being able to have a server run for as many years as that is excellent, giving us enough time to spin up new servers to slowly migrate information. In the meantime, Ubuntu has started supporting or giving longer support terms as well, thanks to Ubuntu Pro or ESM, but that was a little bit too late. So mainly, we do not have to migrate servers every four or five years, allowing us to focus on projects other than simply spinning up new servers and migrating data.

I would like to add that the ability to use the DNF package manager and different modules, such as various versions of PostgreSQL and external repositories like Remi for different PHP versions, is a great feature. I found that to be much easier to support several versions than I was able to on Ubuntu.

One area for improvement with AlmaLinux is the use of SELinux to secure and harden my server, which I find to be a complicated beast. Better documentation on that part could be useful, although there is a lot of material out there.

I choose a nine because nothing is ever perfect. For example, coming from Ubuntu, I found their firewall software easy to use, while with AlmaLinux's entire ecosystem, I always have to look up how to use firewall-cmd. These are just little preferences. I cannot think of anything else AlmaLinux could improve; it serves me well, and I have not been missing anything.

I have been using AlmaLinux since about the time Red Hat, or IBM I think, killed off support for CentOS 8, so shortly after that. I am not sure which year that was.

After switching to AlmaLinux, I experienced that with Ubuntu, services would not reboot, restart, or start automatically when rebooting a server with the same installs and configurations, but I have not encountered such issues with AlmaLinux, making it very stable.

I have no issues with the scalability of AlmaLinux.

I have not needed customer support for AlmaLinux.

I previously used Ubuntu before moving to CentOS for its long-term support, and then I switched to AlmaLinux because CentOS was killed off.

I have not seen a return on investment in terms of needing fewer employees since I am a single-person business, but moving over to AlmaLinux saves a lot of time because of the long-term support, meaning I do not have to support the latest version every couple of years.

AlmaLinux is free, so there are no costs there. The open source licensing helps a lot, and the setup cost is just my own time invested in learning the platform.

Before choosing AlmaLinux, I evaluated Rocky Linux, but it seemed to have the same organizational issues that CentOS faced. I found AlmaLinux to be a safe bet for the long run as it is supported by a foundation without commercial interests. I also contemplated moving back to Ubuntu, but that would have required rewriting all of our configuration scripts, which I did not have time for after just doing that for CentOS.

My advice for others looking into using AlmaLinux is to probably try looking up or learning about this flavor of Linux, their package managers, and SELinux. At the end of the day, it is mostly the same with a different coat. I have no additional thoughts about AlmaLinux; it is a great overall operating system for servers. I gave this review a rating of 9.

My main use case for AlmaLinux involves helping customers migrate from CentOS to AlmaLinux 8 and now AlmaLinux 9 as well. Most of the customers are from CentOS, and I assist them with the traditional migration and using the in-place OS upgrade workflow as well.

Regarding my main use case for AlmaLinux, we did not face any issues during the migration. Most of the customers used traditional migration, which means setting up a new server with AlmaLinux 8, and then our migration team helped them migrate from CentOS 7 to AlmaLinux. It was an easy process because the in-place OS upgrade was taking longer to get upgraded to AlmaLinux, nearly thirty to forty-five days. That was not workable for a couple of customers. That is why we introduced traditional migration, where we set up a new server with AlmaLinux. It was easy, and for about a month, customers had to pay for both servers, but all their domains, files, databases, and everything would be migrated from CentOS to AlmaLinux. We did not face any issues, especially in AlmaLinux. It was great, and most customers were asking for an upgrade since CentOS was end of life.

During the switching to AlmaLinux, the traditional migration with IP swap had very little downtime, and even in-place OS upgrades had a downtime of about three to four hours because customers do not need to buy a new server; we upgrade the OS on the existing server from CentOS to AlmaLinux. We clone their server to a temporary server for testing the upgrade and their website files before applying the same on the production server. We inform our customers that there will be a three to four hour downtime. Traditional migration with the IP swap had very little downtime, and to minimize downtime, we introduced that IP swap along with the traditional migration. However, most customers were not willing to pay for the second server during migration. After we introduced in-place OS upgrades, most customers chose that option instead, even though the downtime was three to four hours. We scheduled downtime during off-peak hours, and everything went well.

AlmaLinux offers several valuable features that I appreciate. The best features include the updated PHP versions available from AlmaLinux. Most of our customers use WordPress websites, which always show a kind of security vulnerability notification saying that their PHP version is out of date. Most customers were asking to upgrade their PHP version, which was not available in CentOS 7. They prefer the latest PHP versions, and we guide them with AlmaLinux. Overall, AlmaLinux 8 is really great, and version 9 is even better. The next better version always has better performance and options. Since CentOS reached end of life, ninety percent of customers have chosen AlmaLinux rather than Ubuntu.

Regarding the features of AlmaLinux, we normally work on fully managed servers. Most of the customers choose cPanel and WHM. I do not see much compatibility issue working on cPanel and WHM in AlmaLinux 8 compared to CentOS. Overall, the performance was really great, the options were excellent, and all services were up to date in AlmaLinux, which was not the case in CentOS. Regarding security, AlmaLinux is more secure than CentOS.

AlmaLinux has positively impacted my organization significantly. Most of our customers were on CentOS 7, and when CentOS announced it would reach end of life, they began to panic, asking what their next options were.

I wish host access control in AlmaLinux could be made easier the way it was in CentOS because host access control was not working as expected in AlmaLinux during the initial stages. Later, we implemented some other methods that began to work, but initially, it was not operational. Host access control in WHM with AlmaLinux is my concern. Apart from that, AlmaLinux is really good, easier as well, and I do not see much difference between CentOS and AlmaLinux.

Regarding improvements needed for AlmaLinux, the documentation available is great. A simple Google search yields related documents which help in our work. About the documentation, I would say eighty percent of it is available, so if there is a plan to improve, focusing on that remaining twenty percent would be beneficial. Additionally, I would prefer documentation available for AlmaLinux when cPanel WHM is installed on the server, including how to use the tools. If documentation for Plesk or NodeWorx and SiteWorx is available, it would be very helpful for customers using AlmaLinux to navigate their servers.

I have been using AlmaLinux for the past two years.

Overall, AlmaLinux is really good. After CentOS, most customers panicked about what to do when their OS reached end of life. We introduced AlmaLinux, which is truly great regarding performance and efficiency. Everything looks very good in AlmaLinux. I believe people always look for more features and easier ways to handle servers, so any tools or improvements in the future would be beneficial. Overall, AlmaLinux is an excellent option.

My advice for others considering using AlmaLinux is to keep everything up to date, especially the OS, which is very important. I believe AlmaLinux is good until at least twenty twenty-seven or twenty twenty-nine. I give this product an overall rating of eight out of ten.

My main use case for AlmaLinux is using it as a container base image. As a product-based company, we use AlmaLinux as the base image in our performance testing tool. According to client requirements, if they require a Debian base container, we provide Ubuntu. If they require an RHEL base container, we provide AlmaLinux. On top of that, we provide our product.

AlmaLinux offers the best features in that it is freeware for RHEL, and it is really reliable. AlmaLinux is reliable because it is stable, and it is easy to maintain since our environment is secure on layer one and AlmaLinux works on layer four. Security is not a concern for us in this context.

AlmaLinux has positively impacted my organization in terms of performance and cost savings. In terms of cost saving, using an RHEL-based container image requires a subscription for RHEL, and for AlmaLinux, we do not require any subscription. We can easily use it and save considerable money. We have a number of clients, and if we provide a container image to each client, using RHEL requires a subscription, but for AlmaLinux, we can provide it as freeware which saves substantial money. I cannot calculate the exact amount because it is not a fixed number for clients; it applies to more than fifty clients.

AlmaLinux could be improved by having some basic components, such as ifconfig and netstat, pre-installed on the container image, as that would be really helpful for us. I chose nine out of ten because for some use cases, any client may require something specific that necessitates a subscription for RHEL. Since it is not possible to add a subscription on AlmaLinux, we use the RHEL official container image with the subscription in those cases. If something is added to AlmaLinux that allows for some subscription or makes it exactly equal to RHEL, it would be perfect.

I have been using AlmaLinux for four to five years.

If you require an RHEL based container image or operating system, you must try AlmaLinux as it is freeware. I give this product a rating of nine out of ten.

Currently, I can see the installation date on my server. I mainly use AlmaLinux both at home and for testing purposes. I started using it because I wanted a stable Enterprise Linux distribution with long-term support, and AlmaLinux perfectly fits that use case for me.

For my home server, this is my main service. It is a small server for file sharing and to store my personal data, videos, photos, and other important files. If I have time, I upload my data to the server and use it as a central solid solution. I also use it as a Plex media server, which allows my family and me to easily watch downloaded videos and movies.

As a desktop system, I use AlmaLinux. Today, I reinstalled AlmaLinux 8 because sometimes, when I have spare time, I create minimal scripts for Wi-Fi checking or service testing. I appreciate the opportunity to experiment, try configurations, and understand how the operating system behaves in real-life scenarios.

Before I started using AlmaLinux, I was a distro-hopper, jumping from one system to another. One day I would use Ubuntu, the next time Oracle Linux, and after that Gentoo. Currently, I am focusing on Enterprise Linux, especially AlmaLinux.

What I especially appreciate about AlmaLinux is the long-term support, which I consider a top priority because many companies and other users need to focus on support, and I believe AlmaLinux is the best for it. AlmaLinux is also very stable and robust, which I find very useful.

I think AlmaLinux could improve by activating third-party repositories. Perhaps this was a policy decision, but I see the lack of these repositories as risky. If I suggest AlmaLinux to someone who wants to learn a Linux distribution but has no experience, it could become complicated. For example, on my laptop, the Wi-Fi is not working because AlmaLinux does not ship with acceptable drivers for it. This is fine for me because I understand that sometimes drivers are not available, but I believe it would be beneficial to have them.

I have been using AlmaLinux for more than two years.

Regarding stability, I think it is fine. Since I started using AlmaLinux, I have not encountered any issue with kernel crashes or upgrading. Whenever I receive an upgrade, I simply use 'sudo dnf upgrade', and everything works fine.

I have never contacted any sort of technical support regarding AlmaLinux because I do not need it. As I mentioned, if I encounter any problem or find a bug or issue, I use AI or Google to resolve it.

I have used Rocky Linux, Oracle Linux, Ubuntu, Manjaro, Linux Mint, Fedora, and Red Hat. Red Hat can be used for community purposes, but there are some requirements.

From my point of view, the deployment of AlmaLinux is absolutely easy. I download any ISO, create it on Ventoy or another tool, and possibly use Rufus for Windows. After plugging it into the laptop, I choose the boot system, and everything is fine. I receive a welcome message, then I need to choose the keyboard and language. Following that, I see the system requirements, the root user, and system settings such as date and time. After that, I choose whatever I want to install, click to install, and everything is fine. I find it very easy, at least for me.

Regarding pricing for AlmaLinux, I think it is good. As far as I know, when Linus Torvalds created the Linux kernel, he mentioned that everyone could use it and modify it under a GPL public license. Since AlmaLinux uses the Linux kernel and open-source applications alongside third-party applications, I am fine with this. In the open-source environment, I believe a Linux distribution is always free of cost.

When I compare AlmaLinux to alternatives, I think it is somewhat different because I try to separate them. I believe Enterprise Linux distributions, including Red Hat, Oracle, AlmaLinux, and Rocky, are very fine systems. Others, such as Ubuntu, Arch Linux, and Manjaro, have fewer vendors in my opinion.

Regarding my experience today, I installed AlmaLinux 8, and everything is okay, but the significant problem is that AlmaLinux does not ship with Wi-Fi drivers. For me, this is not a problem because I grew up with Linux and open source, so I know that I need to research and troubleshoot this issue. I found many third-party repositories, and with these, I could use my Wi-Fi and install any other third-party applications. So in comparison with the others, this is a slight disadvantage.

I do not think AlmaLinux requires any maintenance on my end to keep working. If I encounter any problem, I could use AI or Google. The open-source and Linux world is very interesting. If you have any problem, you cannot simply ask a neighbor to check your Linux system because they may not be familiar with it. For me, this is fine, and I do not think it needs maintenance. My overall rating for AlmaLinux is eight out of ten.

I provide hosting and email services for customers using AlmaLinux. Most of our customers are using Plesk for managing their domains, and some servers end up having 300 or 400 domains, while others have around 50. Overall, the setup is the same; all of them are using AlmaLinux 9 or AlmaLinux 8, and we are currently configuring and migrating all of our infrastructure towards the newer AlmaLinux technologies and operating systems.

In my experience, the best features that AlmaLinux offers are not really different when comparing it with CentOS because we actually migrated from CentOS to AlmaLinux. AlmaLinux seems a bit more stable, but if we're talking about speed and efficiency, I noticed some gaps. For example, some of the services or web services that we are using acted differently on CentOS compared to AlmaLinux 9 or AlmaLinux 8 in terms of response times and memory consumption. We had many issues with memory consumption, and when we actually migrated initially, we migrated from servers that were using around 8 gigabytes of RAM, but when migrated to AlmaLinux 8, they needed more memory instead. So the customer needed to actually buy more memory. Even though AlmaLinux provided more stability and security patches, this came with a cost in terms of memory usage, and that was not really expected.

Positively, I can say that AlmaLinux has brought a sense of stability, and besides the security patches, we also noticed better virtualization for our use cases. Stability, security patches, and improved virtualization are the main positive aspects I have observed.

I would like to see better tools in terms of memory consumption with AlmaLinux. I would like to know what processes exactly are consuming how much memory and have better core dumps or system core dumps so I can access them and investigate them instead of feeding the server with more and more memory. Another thing I would like to see is still about memory consumption; I would like to see an optimized kernel for AlmaLinux. The AlmaLinux team can look into this and see what they can improve in terms of resource consumption and monitoring tools that can actually help the users of AlmaLinux pinpoint the exact processes or services that are causing that amount of resource consumption.

Memory consumption when we migrated from CentOS to AlmaLinux was a really big hit for us, and we didn't expect it. After six months of migration, we ended up using more resources for the same websites, and that's not acceptable.

I have been working in my current field for about five years.

AlmaLinux is stable.

AlmaLinux customer support is really nice; they provided us with quite some solutions for the problems we encountered.

Negative

We used CentOS before AlmaLinux.

We are the provider; we provide AlmaLinux servers and infrastructure to our customers.

My advice for others looking into using AlmaLinux is to just try it out and see if it suits your needs, and if it does, that's great. I would rate this review an 8 out of 10.

I am using AlmaLinux as a hosting platform for my application. I have taken VMs and deployed a React and Node-based application on AlmaLinux.

I am using AlmaLinux only for hosting my application server. My application is used daily, but I do not use AlmaLinux login every day. When I need to update anything in the application, then I use it.

AlmaLinux is deployed in my organization on the public cloud through AWS. I purchased AlmaLinux through the AWS Marketplace.

As an application server, it will not save any employee costs or anything.

AlmaLinux is lightweight, so my hardware resource usage is very low, and I am able to use it effectively.

AlmaLinux provides regular updates, and the security is very good because it is a flavor of Linux. I know that Linux security is excellent.

AlmaLinux's performance is very good, and I am getting high performance in my application, which is a very positive thing. It is very reliable with excellent performance.

I notice faster load times and reduced resource usage with AlmaLinux. That is the main benefit I have experienced.

AlmaLinux is stable and scalable with good scalability features.

AlmaLinux can be improved in terms of hardware support. On some latest PCs, it is not supported. I recently tried to install it on a PC with the latest Windows, but I encountered some hardware compatibility issues.

Better hardware implementation for AlmaLinux would be very beneficial. If they would implement support for high-end gaming laptops, then it would be very good for us.

I have been using AlmaLinux for the last one year.

I did not attend any customer support calls for AlmaLinux because my team handles it. I am only handling the deployment, and the deployment is very good.

I was using Ubuntu before, but I found that Ubuntu was taking too many hardware resources. I started exploring and then found AlmaLinux, which uses low resource usage.

I evaluated Ubuntu before choosing AlmaLinux.

I would rate AlmaLinux an eight as an application server or if you use it as a server. If you use it as an operating system, then it will not be good. It is not user-friendly like Windows.

I chose eight because I think there are some hardware usage issues with AlmaLinux. It is not supporting the latest hardware, so that is not good. If it did, I would suggest it for laptops also.

There are no other improvements needed for AlmaLinux that I have not mentioned yet.

I did not see the pricing for AlmaLinux because that is handled by another team. A different purchasing team in my organization handles the pricing.

If you want to host an application in a VM, then you should go for AlmaLinux. It will take low hardware resources, and you can get high scalability.

There are no other additional thoughts about AlmaLinux.

My overall rating for AlmaLinux is eight.