Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9 (redhat 9) | Support by SupportedImages Reviews

I use Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9 (redhat 9) | Support by SupportedImages for customer applications, customer application servers, sometimes for Oracle databases, and occasionally for IBM products. We install Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9 (redhat 9) | Support by SupportedImages for security reasons; customers always prefer the latest version due to security issues, though there are cases where we have to revert to lower versions, but most of the time, they opt for the latest version with the latest patches.

I have used containers very little, as we are only now moving toward containerization. Previously, we only used bare metal OS. Recently, customers are requesting containerization, and we are starting to provide those solutions, but it is still in the early stages in Bangladesh.

For integration with hybrid cloud technologies, most of the time the integration is done via API or direct communication through applications. While the OS itself has the capability, we primarily utilize APIs or other methods such as file transfers for integration, which means I prefer other software beyond the OS for that purpose.

Most of my deployments are on-premise because my clients are banks, which face geographical and compliance constraints. Only a few of them are on cloud environments for testing purposes, but all production deployments are primarily on-premise.

We have utilized Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9 (redhat 9) | Support by SupportedImages on AWS cloud for testing and some development purposes, but none of it is for production; it is strictly for software development teams.

From my experience as a partner, the biggest advantage of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9 (redhat 9) | Support by SupportedImages is that it is a stable and reliable product. It is a reliable OS when I am using it for applications because we run middleware software upon the OS, which means if there are problems or security holes in the OS, my applications also face those issues. In that scenario, the stability and security of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9 (redhat 9) | Support by SupportedImages is commendable.

The security policy of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9 (redhat 9) | Support by SupportedImages is improved, but security measures must still be implemented. After we install the operating system, the customer's bank security team will harden the OS to block any potential breaches or malicious activities.

To measure performance with Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9 (redhat 9) | Support by SupportedImages, I assess how much RAM and CPU the background processes are consuming. I can restrict these processes to ensure that minimal background processes run, allowing my application server software and applications to operate better with the available memory and CPU resources.

I cannot say there are significant disadvantages, but people are using Oracle Linux more due to the fact that updates are free. With Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9 (redhat 9) | Support by SupportedImages, I have to pay for subscriptions to get updates, which can be a disadvantage compared to Ubuntu or Oracle Linux. Other than that, the product is essentially similar since Oracle Linux is based on the Red Hat kernel with minor changes. While there is a cost-related disadvantage, feature-wise it remains comparable.

I have been dealing with Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9 (redhat 9) | Support by SupportedImages for two years, basically using it in my projects.

I have been working with Red Hat products for almost fifteen years, but specifically with version 9 for two years.

In terms of stability, Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9 (redhat 9) | Support by SupportedImages is ninety-nine percent stable and reliable.

When it comes to scalability, if I want to increase RAM or other components, it is quite easy. I simply need to install new RAM in the hardware, and the operating system easily recognizes it, allowing it to be used right away. Scalability is therefore very straightforward; as long as the motherboard has the necessary ports to install additional CPUs or RAM, it is not complex.

Regarding the technical team of Red Hat, I find the support to be a mixed bag. In my region during office hours, calls go to the Asia Pacific support team, which is not up to the mark. However, if I log calls late at night, they are routed to the European team, which provides excellent support. Unfortunately, the local Asia Pacific support has been inadequate for the last four or five years across all products, including Oracle Linux, Oracle databases, and Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9 (redhat 9) | Support by SupportedImages.

I would rate the local support team around five or six out of ten.

I find the installation of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9 (redhat 9) | Support by SupportedImages and its deployment to be straightforward. The hardening aspect is a bit trickier since that is handled by security procedures, but overall, the installation process is quite comparable across all operating systems.

I am a partner working for the customer, doing the deployment and other things, so I am not just a customer. All of my work is onsite.

Even though it is a bit pricey, I see value for money with Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9 (redhat 9) | Support by SupportedImages. Red Hat releases the latest security features first, and others tend to copy them or rely on community development. Thus, it holds a competitive advantage in terms of security, vulnerability mitigation, and related improvements, making it worth the investment for organizations.

We do not use open-source support for Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9 (redhat 9) | Support by SupportedImages because for banks and regulatory policies, we must have a subscription. Moreover, Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9 (redhat 9) | Support by SupportedImages does not provide updates for free; subscriptions are necessary for updates.

In terms of pricing, Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9 (redhat 9) | Support by SupportedImages is slightly on the higher side compared to Ubuntu and Oracle Linux subscriptions. It is priced at about eighteen to twenty percent more, but not dramatically so; it is just slightly higher.

The biggest difference when comparing Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9 (redhat 9) | Support by SupportedImages to Oracle or Ubuntu lies in the subscription model. Besides that, they are almost the same.

I continue to deal with IBM products. Red Hat itself is an IBM company, which means I work with both. I would give Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9 (redhat 9) | Support by SupportedImages a general rating of eight point five, or possibly a nine. My overall review rating for this product is nine.

I am ready to shift from a project I was focused on, and I took a break recently. I stopped working with Red Hat Enterprise Linux while I was working with Ericsson Global Services Private Limited in India. I was in Sweden for a while, visiting three times. I left Ericsson about two years ago and have been working on freelancing since then.

I remain in touch with Red Hat Enterprise Linux as it is my core focus. I have been dealing with both versions 8 and 9. I am a user of Red Hat Enterprise Linux, and I work as a Linux administrator with RHCE certification.

I recently found features such as SystemCTL and the init process boot up to be significantly faster now. Cloud integration is quite easy, and containerization support along with file system level enhancements has improved considerably. The system is much more stable, including LVMs.

I utilize Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9's SELinux for enforcing security policies, which is quite advanced. It has helped considerably for securing the server in my organization.

To improve Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9, I suggest adding better features, patch management, and enhancing SELinux even further. Breaking SELinux is very difficult, but challenges still exist. Port management is somewhat challenging, and opening ports when SELinux is enabled can be problematic. Proper logging is needed when trying to run a service that requires a particular port.

I have been working with Red Hat Enterprise Linux for ten years now.

The technical support by Red Hat Enterprise Linux overall meets my needs quite well. The support engineers have good knowledge of the product, and whenever I seek support, issues get resolved.

There is room for improvement regarding response time and first-level support quality. I can now file support reports and get feedback online. Instead of calling, I visit the Red Hat Enterprise Linux website and open a ticket, which has become a seamless process.

My experience with the setup was that it was easy to set up and straightforward to use.

I did not use Podman in Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9 for container management, but I am aware it exists. I was using a VMware setup with OVF kind of images instead.

We have yet to fully assess Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9's integration with hybrid cloud technologies, but I have observed good features compared with version 8. I conducted a proof of concept with Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9 for integration with hybrid cloud technologies, though the scope was limited. When it moves into production, I will have a clearer understanding of its capabilities. Overall, the feedback and proof of concept outcome were successful.

I did not use open-source support in Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9. To measure the performance of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9, I have CDRs pertaining to the application, where I input data to the server and measure the processing speed and output, tracking how many milliseconds it takes. The load on an idle server runs very fast as I provide it with a substantial amount of load, and I receive feedback on that.

I rate Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9 | Support by SupportedImages overall as an eight out of ten. To bring it closer to a ten, I would prefer to see advanced features such as Podman and other next-generation requirements, which already exist in Red Hat Enterprise Linux. Advanced-level Docker support is also available, and altogether, the system performs well. These features already exist and can be improved based on specific requirements, but as of now, what is needed in the real world already exists in the market.

We have a direct subscription through Ericsson, though I am uncertain whether they purchased it from the AWS marketplace, directly from Red Hat, or from a third party. I rate Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9 | Support by SupportedImages with an overall score of eight out of ten.

Windows plays a role just for my daily office tasks, such as checking email and using Teams, but my real software work is on Linux.

My real project utilizes Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9 (redhat 9) | Support by SupportedImages for personal use, definitely Red Hat.

I sometimes also use Ubuntu. When asking for what purpose I use it, I explain that all software is compiled on the version, so we create a virtual machine on top of Red Hat, involving both compilation and the virtual machine.

I believe that we recently upgraded from 8 to 9 because of more security features and for policy reasons, among other things.

Concerning the feature, I reference improvements for security. 

Maybe for the virtual machine management, we utilize Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9 (redhat 9) | Support by SupportedImages because it is so powerful. We have a lower version of Red Hat for previous virtual machine management, and since we now have a new version, virtual machine management is more complicated.

I am working with tools like Windows, Linux, GitHub, GitLab, and all of these products for more than 20 years.

With Linux specifically, I confirm that I have experience in this area.

Definitely, sometimes with a new version of the software, issues such as memory or hard disk capacity arise, so we have to check performance and run performance tests from time to time.

I cannot say anything specific about that.

I would rate this as nine; at least a nine, which is perfect.

I would rate scalability as nine; it is the best.

There is not much involved; I just run commands from RPM or execute commands, and there is not much to earn from it.

It is pricey, but our product requires a high level of security and performance, making it much better than Ubuntu and other Linux options.

I think it is Linux because at home I work on Mac; I can do whatever I want, as it is very quick, convenient, and offers a beautiful GUI with many tools, but at work, things are different.