Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users
Senior Architect at a hospitality company with 10,001+ employees
Real User
Top 20Leaderboard
Offers support when needed but the price can be better
Pros and Cons
  • "The most valuable feature of Red Hat Enterprise Linux is its support. I primarily use the product because it offers a phone number for support when needed."
  • "The most valuable feature of Red Hat Enterprise Linux is its support."
  • "There is room for improvement in terms of pricing and its knowledge base. I consider the cost high. The knowledge base is extensive and deep but can be confusing due to outdated or non-applicable information that you have to sift through to find relevant answers"
  • "Customer service varies. I would rate their support a five out of ten, as it depends on the person at the other end."

What is our primary use case?

We use Red Hat Enterprise Linux as the operating system to host various applications developed by our application group. It has our test tools, web servers, and Java applications. We install it based on the requirements of the applications.

How has it helped my organization?

It is a good product. All Linux solutions are pretty solid. It carries a different business model than a lot of them, which fits more into our business model. That is where it excels. We do not prefer unsupported ones or buying third-party support.

What is most valuable?

The most valuable feature of Red Hat Enterprise Linux is its support. I primarily use the product because it offers a phone number for support when needed. 

It integrates well with our existing systems like SaltStack for patching and provisioning. However, its primary value is in having support when issues arise.

What needs improvement?

There is room for improvement in terms of pricing and its knowledge base. 

I consider the cost high. The knowledge base is extensive and deep but can be confusing due to outdated or non-applicable information that you have to sift through to find relevant answers.

Buyer's Guide
Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL)
October 2025
Learn what your peers think about Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL). Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: October 2025.
870,701 professionals have used our research since 2012.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have had experience with the basic and extensive use of Red Hat Enterprise Linux for about 15 years.

How are customer service and support?

Customer service varies. I would rate their support a five out of ten, as it depends on the person at the other end. Sometimes the support is good, and sometimes it is not so good. It is like any other support organization.

How would you rate customer service and support?

Neutral

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

I did not switch from any previous solution. Red Hat Enterprise Linux has been in use since before my tenure.

I work in the casino gaming industry. Most of our servers are in Windows. We have about 30 Linux instances. We install it based on the implementation requirements of an application. There is a justification for putting an application into our environment. It goes through a process at our company, and then where we install it or what we install it on is usually up to the requirements of the application.

How was the initial setup?

We have on-premises and cloud-based environments. Red Hat Enterprise Linux is running in one of those environments. It has adequate features for security in cloud environments. 

We use SaltStack, and we built the patching mechanism ourselves. We are pretty satisfied with it. If we were not satisfied, we would change it.

The upgrades with Leapp used to be painful. It used to not work at all for us. When we went to Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9, it did work, but it was a fairly painful process. The advantage is we do not have to reinstall the apps on top of the new image of Red Hat. It is an in-place upgrade. The problem is that you can install Red Hat Enterprise Linux in 50 different ways, and in the past, Leapp assumed you did it the default way. They have added some flexibility so that we can work around some of the stuff, but it makes you install it a certain way, which is not necessarily the way we would do it, mainly because of our security standards and performance needs.

What was our ROI?

We have not experienced a noticeable return on investment with Red Hat Enterprise Linux itself, as the operating system serves its intended function without bringing additional advantages.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

Pricing depends on the model used, costing about $3,000 per virtual host in the virtual environment. It varies depending on whether you get high availability. There are modules that are upsold such as kernel patching, which we do not use due to cost considerations.

In the cloud, we use their licensing. For on-premise, we use the subscription, so we have two different licensing models.

What other advice do I have?

I would rate Red Hat Enterprise Linux a seven out of ten.

Disclosure: My company does not have a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer.
Flag as inappropriate
PeerSpot user
Alexander Muylalert - PeerSpot reviewer
Linux system administrator at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees
MSP
Top 20
Has made significant contributions to our business continuity and compliance efforts
Pros and Cons
  • "Red Hat always clearly describes the vulnerability on its security pages as a CVE score. You can fix errors by patching or mitigating them. If the patch hasn't been released, you can mitigate it to prevent the vulnerability from being exploited. RHEL helps us guide the data and ensure it is correctly placed. I was monitoring it daily, but it was a bit too frequently. Now, we get vulnerability notifications weekly or monthly about a vulnerability or exploit that's been discovered. I also look on Reddit directly to see if there's a fix or a mitigation we can implement."
  • "Sometimes, when upgrading or migrating systems, there are differences in the repositories of the versions that aren't one-to-one replaceable. For example, there are significant differences in the repositories from version 7 to 8. We needed to upgrade RHEL from version 7 to 8 because it had reached the end of its life. A Postgres database was running on it that used a RHEL 7 package, allowing some database or reporting features. When I upgraded to RHEL 8, it was not in the repository. I needed to install it with some workaround. Of course, it was installed with some minor incompatible dependencies."

What is our primary use case?

In our environment, we primarily use Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) for managing customer environments and our own. The customer environments are mostly Apache web servers. Some customers have databases, like Postgres, running on Red Hat Enterprise Linux. Others run native Docker on it to manage application dependencies. 

We run containerization projects in the OpenShift environment based on Red Hat Enterprise Linux OS because that's more suitable for containerized workloads. You can do some machines on Red Hat Enterprise Linux, but not all of them. Your worker nodes need to be Red Hat CoreOS, but your master nodes can be Red Hat Enterprise Linux.

I was more experienced with other Linux distributions and Docker. It's open source, so you can fetch Docker and run it, but they don't have support if you have questions or if something isn't working as expected. Podman is similar to Docker. I don't primarily use Red Hat Enterprise Linux for containerization, but I set something up in Podman on Red Hat Enterprise Linux. It isn't used that much. Tinkering and development are the main reasons you would use Podman on a single centralized Red Hat Enterprise Linux machine. If you want to orchestrate on a larger scale, you use OpenShift.

How has it helped my organization?

Red Hat Enterprise Linux has made significant contributions to our business continuity and compliance efforts. If a critical vulnerability is spotted in the wild, Red Hat fixes it most of the time. It's usually within a day if it's a zero-day vulnerability. Log4J was a bit more difficult because it was not a single package, but it was mostly shipped with other products. It's hard to analyze which application is vulnerable and whatnot. The solution lets us centralize development. We use Ansible to orchestrate the tooling deployment or to fetch a lot of information. 

What is most valuable?

Red Hat always clearly describes the vulnerability on its security pages as a CVE score. You can fix errors by patching or mitigating them. If the patch hasn't been released, you can mitigate it to prevent the vulnerability from being exploited. Red Hat Enterprise Linux helps us guide the data and ensure it is correctly placed. I was monitoring it daily, but it was a bit too frequently. Now, we get vulnerability notifications weekly or monthly about a vulnerability or exploit that's been discovered. I also look on Reddit directly to see if there's a fix or a mitigation we can implement.

What needs improvement?

Sometimes, when upgrading or migrating systems, there are differences in the repositories of the versions that aren't one-to-one replaceable. For example, there are significant differences in the repositories from version 7 to 8. We needed to upgrade Red Hat Enterprise Linux from version 7 to 8 because it had reached the end of its life. A Postgres database was running on it that used a Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7 package, allowing some database or reporting features. When I upgraded to Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8, it was not in the repository. I needed to install it with some workaround. Of course, it was installed with some minor incompatible dependencies. 

I have mixed feelings about the built-in security features. SELinux must be configured correctly for the port and directory, or applications won't run, so we primarily disable it. Sometimes, we enable it and tinker with legacy systems deployed long before I joined the company. However, chances are it will break something if you enable it. 

For how long have I used the solution?

We have been using RHEL for three years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

Red Hat Enterprise Linux has performed very well for our business-critical applications, with minimal downtime.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

We don't need to dynamically scale our application because of our workloads, as we mostly use Red Hat Enterprise Linux for our internal tools. We don't have much demand to scale out.  Containerization lets you quickly scale out your application with some bots if your hardware supports it, and you have enough resources. 

In VMs, we didn't need to dynamically hot plug some service to compensate for the load. It would be vertical scaling by adding more resources. Sometimes, we need to do that for databases that consume a lot of memory, CPU, power, etc.

How are customer service and support?

I rate Red Hat support eight out of 10. It depends on the priority of the requests. We had to launch several P1 requests because something wasn't working in our OpenShift environment, and we were stuck. The support response was quick.

However, we were annoyed that most of the support was based in India. Sometimes, they don't know what the problem is and need to escalate it to an expert in the US or or Germany. It prolongs the ticket resolution, but once it gets to the expert, they fix the problem instantly because they know more. 

How would you rate customer service and support?

Positive

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We previously used other Linux distributions with Docker. We prefer Red Hat Enterprise Linux because of its enterprise support capabilities, which open-source distributions like Debian or Ubuntu lack.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

I'm unsure what the standard Red Hat Enterprise Linux license costs for one machine. We pay for premium support that guarantees a response in two hours. 

What other advice do I have?

I rate Red Hat Enterprise Linux eight out of 10. If applications and package installations work correctly, I would give it an 8.5. It's a pleasing OS to work with, especially Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8 and 9, which are more polished than Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7. I briefly interacted with Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6, I'm 27, so I know I'm very young, but I know colleagues who worked with Red Hat Enterprise Linux 4, 5, and 3. 

Other open-source Linux distributions might work if they have high levels of community involvement so the community can identify and fix vulnerabilities quickly. Alma and Rocky Linux are all upstream from Red Hat Enterprise Linux. If you want to go with an open-source distribution, I will point you to Alma and Rocky because they are the one-to-one replacements from CentOS. You don't need a subscription. 

We are a big company with many customers, so we prefer a stable platform with support. You can't open a ticket for open-source distributions like Debian or Ubuntu if you have a problem, ticket. With Red Hat, you can open a ticket if you discover a bug. That's included in your support subscription. You also get regular patches, so we can show our customers we are compliant, etcetera. It's a no-brainer to use an enterprise distribution with support instead of something open source where you don't have a support subscription.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: My company does not have a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer.
PeerSpot user
Buyer's Guide
Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL)
October 2025
Learn what your peers think about Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL). Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: October 2025.
870,701 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Antonio Martins - PeerSpot reviewer
EMEA Core Banking Operations Manager at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees
Real User
Top 20
Operates consistently across different platforms and provides good stability and performance
Pros and Cons
  • "One of the advantages of Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) is that it operates consistently across different platforms, meaning you don’t have to change your processes or tools when working with various environments."
  • "One improvement could be more radical removal or disabling of obsolete, non-secure features, specifically regarding hardening the system."

What is our primary use case?

In my particular case, we have some development and testing environments that we run on Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL), and we currently produce specific software for financial entities that is developed and certified for Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL), with clients running it in production and us delivering support to those clients.

What is most valuable?

Stability and performance are what I appreciate the most about it. 

Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) makes it easier to manage hybrid environments because it is widely compatible with all kinds of platforms and protocols, allowing integration with various systems. It is very convenient for me since I have both on-premises installations and cloud installations. A few years ago, we transitioned several machines from baremetal systems to the cloud, and the process was very smooth. One of the advantages of Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) is that it operates consistently across different platforms, meaning you don’t have to change your processes or tools when working with various environments. This reliability is particularly beneficial for my operations.

What needs improvement?

One improvement could be more radical removal or disabling of obsolete, non-secure features, specifically regarding hardening the system. While I'm not sure if this is different on Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) 10, my team has installed the first one today.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) for 10 years now, and I have been working with Red Hat as an older brand for about 25 years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) is very stable, and I don't recall the last time we had an issue that was not caused by a user.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The scalability of Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) is very good because it allows changes to be introduced on the fly without having to reboot machines, and it is very stable. We have reached a maturity level in Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) that is very efficient, giving us a lot of confidence in the product.

How are customer service and support?

I haven't contacted technical support or customer support regarding Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) in the last few years.

How would you rate customer service and support?

Neutral

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

While not exactly comparable, we also work with AIX from IBM as another platform, which is currently provided by the same group because IBM owns Red Hat. I have worked in previous years with other Linux distributions, such as Debian, Ubuntu, and Slackware, although I haven't worked with them for a while.

I have a very strong empathy for open-source systems, and Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) runs on an open-source kernel, which I appreciate because it allows for innovation and development of the system itself based on collaboration from different inputs. AIX is more closed with its own benefits, and Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) runs on more platforms, while AIX is IBM-based.

How was the initial setup?

Deploying Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) is easy. It isn't a complex process right now, and there is a lot of documentation and information available to support them during that process.

The patching process is currently stable and very efficient, with frequent and scheduled releases that allow us to plan how we roll them out on our side. We have a scheduled patching process every month, even if there isn't anything to do. There are usually updates available, and we also have monitoring features that ensure the system is healthy and working properly, so we don't require live monitoring by a user, just some occasional cleanup in terms of logs and environment since it's mainly a development and test setup.

What other advice do I have?

When you have your own systems on-premises, defining a lifecycle means needing to replace hardware, storage, and acquire equipment beforehand, whereas in the cloud, you don't have to do that because you pay as you use. This makes it easier to acquire new VMs on the cloud and install new images, moving from old machines to new ones without needing to get rid of old physical machines, thus making the cloud more flexible in the lifecycle perspective.

The business value of Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) compared to other Linux distributions lies in the full set of systems and services it offers. While I haven't used the service support in recent years due to having a mature team that can solve problems, the support from Red Hat gives us great confidence in the software's quality, patching, and continuous development.

I would rate Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) a 9 out of 10.

Disclosure: PeerSpot contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
Flag as inappropriate
PeerSpot user
Senior Systems Engineer at a insurance company with 5,001-10,000 employees
Real User
Efficient installation process accelerates task completion and boosts performance
Pros and Cons
  • "Security requirements were a key consideration in choosing Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) due to its ease of use, robust security features, and comprehensive experience and support."
  • "The customer service and technical support are good, though they have declined in quality compared to previous standards."

What is our primary use case?

My main use cases for Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) are on the infrastructure side, including patching, building, engineering, administration, and a little bit of everything.

What is most valuable?

The feature I appreciate the most about Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) is its installation, which includes numerous capabilities. The installation process, especially when automating tasks, provides great satisfaction when it works. These features benefit my company because they enable tasks to be completed quickly.

What needs improvement?

I cannot identify specific improvements needed for Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) at this time. We are currently using version 9.6, and it is performing satisfactorily. I would need to work with it daily to provide specific feedback. However, the documentation could be more user-friendly and comprehensive. Instead of simply stating procedures, it should provide more detailed explanations through multiple layers of implementation. The documentation could be simplified for beginners who are unfamiliar with the system. In our organization, we write our own documentation to address these needs.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) along with CentOS throughout this period.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) helps me address vulnerabilities, particularly high CVEs with scores of 10 and nine. The build-out capabilities are beneficial, and Ansible integration works effectively with RHEL.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) scales very effectively to meet my company's needs.

How are customer service and support?

The customer service and technical support are good, though they have declined in quality compared to previous standards. Currently, support often responds by sending PDF documentation, and scheduling direct calls can be challenging.

How would you rate customer service and support?

How was the initial setup?

Security requirements were a key consideration in choosing Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) due to its ease of use, robust security features, and comprehensive experience and support. Support availability was particularly important among these factors.

What was our ROI?

From my perspective, the biggest return on investment when using Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) has been its excellent performance and issue resolution capabilities.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

I am not considering alternative solutions to Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) at this time due to our current three-year contract commitment.

What other advice do I have?

I would rate Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) a 9 out of 10 and advise other companies considering RHEL to proceed with implementation. They should complete their customer assessment and work with Red Hat representatives. The solution is highly recommended, despite minor support-related concerns.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

Hybrid Cloud

If public cloud, private cloud, or hybrid cloud, which cloud provider do you use?

Amazon Web Services (AWS)
Disclosure: My company does not have a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer.
Flag as inappropriate
PeerSpot user
Anan Ff - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior System Engineer at Norwin Technologies
Real User
Top 5
Integrated features support telecom applications with good technical support
Pros and Cons
  • "Technical support from Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) has been very good."
  • "For telecom products and technical platforms that support RAN engineering, we expect more features to be added to satellite, as it is currently quite complicated."

What is our primary use case?

I was working on Azure cloud migrations using Azure Discovery tool and AWS Endeavor tool. 

I worked with Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) Azure discovery migration tool. I have worked on-premises for 16 years and on the cloud for four years.

I like that there is no downtime during operations. We work to mitigate downtime, but it typically ranges from two to three hours for upgrades and up to four hours for migration work.

What is most valuable?

Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) now uses satellite servers, though we are not getting many materials or awareness about that aspect. Containers have also been implemented in Red Hat Enterprise Linux, but we need more materials and documentation for these features, based on my work experience. 

I have used Red Hat Enterprise Linux in hybrid environments including physical, virtual, and cloud deployments.

Red Hat Enterprise Linux is now integrated with RAN engineering, supporting telecom applications. Features such as Ansible and container applications come built-in since RHEL 8.

I find information through seminar websites and seminar links. With satellite servers, I receive links through which I share and gain knowledge, including online resources, PDF materials, and Udemy courses.

What needs improvement?

For telecom products and technical platforms that support RAN engineering, we expect more features to be added to satellite, as it is currently quite complicated.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been working with Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) for 16 to 17 years. The upgrades and materials have been consistently good.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

Initial container deployment is difficult because the application matters more than the Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) server.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

I would rate the scalability at eight out of ten.

How are customer service and support?

Technical support from Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) has been very good.

How would you rate customer service and support?

Positive

How was the initial setup?

The implementation took approximately six months because it was a RAN application.

What about the implementation team?

Using the framework, I can upgrade directly from 7.9 to 8.1. I have completed upgrades for approximately 2,000 servers using Leap.

What other advice do I have?

I perform server migrations, including physical to physical and physical to virtual transfers. I work on application upgrades and Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) server upgrades. 

I rate this product 8 out of 10. I expect more Ansible features and container features in future releases.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

Hybrid Cloud

If public cloud, private cloud, or hybrid cloud, which cloud provider do you use?

Microsoft Azure
Disclosure: My company does not have a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer.
Flag as inappropriate
PeerSpot user
Sr Software engineer at a consultancy with 1,001-5,000 employees
Real User
Ease of managing workloads and saving time with effective infrastructure automation
Pros and Cons
  • "Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) has positively impacted our organization because all of our enterprise applications run on Red Hat RHEL only, which is the enterprise version, and for our application runs and application connections, we use Red Hat, which is very helpful for managing our entire application."

    What is our primary use case?

    We use Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) for our workloads, DevOps and SRE workloads, to manage our application and CI/CD pipeline runs.

    We use Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) in our DevOps and SRE workloads for DevOps and CI/CD pipeline runs and also for managing our infrastructure.

    We mostly use Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) to automate our infrastructure, and we use it to automate our image cataloging and all those things.

    What is most valuable?

    The best features Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) offers are that it is very easy to use, and the commanding is also straightforward. It's easy to install, easy to configure, and easy to manage all aspects.

    When we need to install or upgrade our version of Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL), we have straightforward commands. Using the DNF command, we execute the commands. When we upgrade the OS version, it is without downtime. We can run that in minimal time.

    Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) has positively impacted our organization because all of our enterprise applications run on Red Hat RHEL only, which is the enterprise version. For our application runs and application connections, we use Red Hat, which is very helpful for managing our entire application.

    We have very minimal downtime, which is beneficial for us. We can improvise our application connectivity and interconnection. Everything performs exceptionally well.

    What needs improvement?

    As of now, there are no notable things to advise, from my understanding. As per customer interaction, Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) listens, every word is counted, and it is improved. At this point, everything performs as expected.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I have been using Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) for almost five-plus years.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) is always stable, and I definitely recommend choosing RHEL.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    In terms of scalability, reliability, and application upgradation, I am satisfied with Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL).

    How are customer service and support?

    The customer support is very interactive and provides quick responses. It is very helpful for us to improve our system.

    How would you rate customer service and support?

    Positive

    How was the initial setup?

    When we need to install or upgrade our version of Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL), we have straightforward commands. Using the DNF command, we execute the commands.

    What was our ROI?

    In terms of investment, we have saved both time and money.

    In terms of hourly and weekly savings, we save almost six to seven hours per week with Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL). This is based on user experience, deployment, configuration, and high availability perspectives.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    At the enterprise level, the pricing, setup cost, and licensing for Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) is as expected. It's quite standard - not very high, not very low. It's appropriate because the support is provided within and depends on our SLO and SLA.

    What other advice do I have?

    Everything is set as expected, which is quite good. We are also expecting the same kind of support from Red Hat. All aspects look good.

    On a scale of 1-10, I rate Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) a 9.5.

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    Public Cloud

    If public cloud, private cloud, or hybrid cloud, which cloud provider do you use?

    Microsoft Azure
    Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer. Partner
    Flag as inappropriate
    PeerSpot user
    reviewer2704971 - PeerSpot reviewer
    Sr. Manager of UNIX and Storage at a tech services company with 5,001-10,000 employees
    MSP
    Offers stability and good support, but security vulnerabilities need addressing
    Pros and Cons
    • "I find Red Hat Enterprise Linux stable."
    • "The uptime is excellent as it's automated and stable."
    • "I don't find Red Hat Enterprise Linux's security features to be good. They have many vulnerabilities that haven't been fixed for many years."
    • "I don't find Red Hat Enterprise Linux's security features to be good. They have many vulnerabilities that haven't been fixed for many years."

    What is our primary use case?

    My experience is primarily on-premises. I work in the financial and banking area, which has about 2,000 VMs.

    How has it helped my organization?

    The benefits are reliability, stability, and good support.

    What is most valuable?

    I find Red Hat Enterprise Linux stable. 

    The knowledge base offered by Red Hat is good. They also have good support for the business. The web console has been acceptable, but we don't really use those tools.

    What needs improvement?

    I don't find Red Hat Enterprise Linux's security features to be good. They have many vulnerabilities that haven't been fixed for many years. They have numerous vulnerabilities that remain unresolved. Just some security details could be fixed. They have many vulnerabilities left over from previous years, with not enough being fixed, and their commitment is only to fix the critical and important ones. For moderate and low severity issues, they don't have the commitment. The security part is weak. Based on all scan reports, they have many vulnerabilities that can't be fixed adequately. 

    We will be involved with some Red Hat Enterprise Linux upgrades or migrations to other cloud platforms. It's not straightforward in my opinion; we have to create an image from Red Hat Virtualization Manager and convert the image to a format that can be recognized by other platforms, such as Microsoft Azure. We have to convert the image and then import it to the Azure cloud. It's not easy, as it requires manual work. There's no tool available for this process.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I have three years of experience with Red Hat Enterprise Linux.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    The uptime is excellent as it's automated and stable. I would say the uptime is very good.

    How are customer service and support?

    Overall, their support is good. I would rate their technical support an eight out of ten.

    How would you rate customer service and support?

    Positive

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    We didn't use any other Linux systems before. Initially, we used other operating systems such as AIX and Solaris, but Red Hat Enterprise Linux was the first Linux we introduced.

    We also have SUSE Linux for one specific product.

    What other advice do I have?

    When it comes to provisioning and patching, we use the satellite. It's acceptable when patching. I am satisfied with the provisioning and patching process as it's easy to manage. We don't use Insight, and I don't know about it. We don't use the Linux image builder or System Roles; we use our own Ansible Playbook to build a system.

    We have all the automation set up for server provisioning and patching. We have the web console, but we don't really use its tools. We use our own Ansible Playbook, which allows us to manage and customize. We have many customizations. All the agents are installed for compliance, IP setup, file system creation - everything is automated.

    When we create a VM, it only takes running the playbook and clicking a button. It takes about two minutes of work, and the automation handles the rest. In about two hours, the VM is up and running. If we use their tools, there are many limitations for customization, and we can only build an OS, but for the rest, we still have to run the automation. That's why we don't use those tools.

    I would rate Red Hat Enterprise Linux a six out of ten.

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    On-premises
    Disclosure: My company does not have a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer.
    Flag as inappropriate
    PeerSpot user
    DavidDuncan4 - PeerSpot reviewer
    Architect at Amazon
    Real User
    Top 20
    Enables consistent networking performance and increases uptime while supporting collaborative problem-solving
    Pros and Cons
    • "Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) by itself scales incredibly."
    • "Normally, if I need help making a customer experience better, I can have a conversation with the business teams at Red Hat, and then we can find a collaborative solution."
    • "For a new release of Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL), the main improvement could be in the pricing models, particularly understanding how to better present those pricing models in a more predictable manner."
    • "The main improvement could be in the pricing models, particularly understanding how to better present those pricing models in a more predictable manner."

    What is our primary use case?

    My main use cases for Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) are Virtual Desktop Interface (VDI) for the server, supporting Telco work workflows, manufacturing software for manufacturing, and travel software. I have a huge base for what we're targeting around AWS or Red Hat solutions.

    What is most valuable?

    I favor the network manager feature of Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL); I appreciate the versatility and flexibility of network manager. I appreciate that we can make super-fast modifications to networking solutions, and I value the support for IPv6. 

    I also value the support for working with the community very specifically. Bringing the solutions we need for customer problems to reality tends to result from our conversations with Red Hat. Normally, if I need help making a customer experience better, I can have a conversation with the business teams at Red Hat, and then we can find a collaborative solution.

    Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) has helped to mitigate downtime and lower risk; although it's hard for me to say that I really understand it outside of an analyst report, I can say that I truly believe it has increased uptime based on my experience. 

    There's a consistency, and my example is that I trust the kernel and the quality engineering, which leads me to more favorable results in places where other distributions might make changes that slow down my networking or storage network in unpredictable ways.

    What needs improvement?

    For a new release of Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL), the main improvement could be in the pricing models, particularly understanding how to better present those pricing models in a more predictable manner. It is very difficult from a partner perspective to figure out how to position software to a customer when the pricing may or may not be competitive, so that's my biggest 'how could I fix this?' question.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I have been using Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) for 25 years.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    When assessing the stability and reliability of Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL), I can say that on every operating system, there are always exceptions and new issues to fix. 

    However, if I have software validated for RHEL, I know I can expect a certain level of certainty that issues will be ones that have either never been seen before or are the result of our new approaches.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) by itself scales incredibly. However, the problem tends to arise where increased consumption raises total costs. 

    As the total cost increases across the operating system distribution, my requirements for support decrease, making it difficult to gauge a return on investment, which complicates the situation for me as a representative of an entire fleet.

    How are customer service and support?

    I would evaluate customer service and technical support as generally positive; I've never had a problem with my support. Sometimes, individual support agents might not know what they're discussing or misunderstand the question, possibly due to my clarity or other factors. I would say that it is at least at the same level or better than any support group I've ever engaged with in technology.

    How would you rate customer service and support?

    Positive

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    Prior to adopting Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL), I was using another solution within the RHEL family. I often test workloads using Fedora or CentOS as a foundation and then move those production workloads to Red Hat.

    How was the initial setup?

    My experience with pricing, setup costs, and licensing has been confusing; it feels different every time. The complications often arise from being unable to predict exactly what is necessary for a deployment, as the build-out and sales cycles are significantly more complex.

    What was our ROI?

    I have most definitely seen a return on investment with Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL); I don't think my job would exist if there wasn't a return on investment.

    Which other solutions did I evaluate?

    By policy, I am required to use Amazon Linux for everything, however, by necessity, I am replacing that with Red Hat solutions where we have space during my evaluation process.

    What other advice do I have?

    My business relationship with Red Hat is that I am a Partner.

    The knowledge base offered by Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) is still hard to search, but I recognize that AI is probably making that easier during this period. I think Lightspeed is an important part of our structure for interacting with the knowledge base information, and I look forward to making that work better.

    I typically advise other organizations considering Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) by asking how important their workload is to them. I question what happens if it goes down and how much time they have to spend fixing it. If they value that aspect, then it's their choice to determine their path. 

    My biggest question often relates to how much they would pay to replace the community, and if they are willing to understand the significant number of partners and open-source champions contributing to Red Hat, they will see how that community cannot be replaced in terms of how software fits their business needs.

    I rate Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) ten out of ten.

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    Hybrid Cloud

    If public cloud, private cloud, or hybrid cloud, which cloud provider do you use?

    Amazon Web Services (AWS)
    Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer. Partner
    Flag as inappropriate
    PeerSpot user
    Buyer's Guide
    Download our free Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) Report and get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions.
    Updated: October 2025
    Buyer's Guide
    Download our free Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) Report and get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions.