Ubuntu Linux Reviews

I use it for everything. I literally use it for any activity that I would do on a computer. I use it for writing code, browsing the web, shopping, and streaming videos and music. I also use it for graphics editing and testing.

It has definitely improved the way I do things. There are so many people who are paying for products that they could use for free. In addition, there are bugs and issues that I hear about from other companies. With this solution, you can reduce the amount you spend in general on technology. Because Linux runs really well, your tech issues are also minimal, and you have to spend less on tech support. 

There is a lot of freedom and flexibility to install it really quickly. It is just very powerful in the sense that it doesn't take up as many resources to run as some of the other operating systems. It is open source, so it is free. There is no licensing fee. 

There is flexibility and freedom to do whatever you need to do. If you are familiar with the command line, you can jump on the command line and configure almost any part of the operating system that you want. If you are not comfortable with the command line, the graphical user interface has really improved ever since I started using Linux back in high school. It is really very simple to manage your settings and other things.

You can also try out multiple desktop environments. As a matter of fact, on one of my laptops, I have installed five different desktop environments, and I can switch between them. If you don't like one, you can easily just install another one with a few commands, and you have got a whole new desktop right there, whereas, in Microsoft Windows or a Mac, you are just stuck with whatever they give you, and you have to wait until they sell you something else.

Like most Linux systems, they can just keep increasing support in Ubuntu for hardware systems. They can increase the number of drivers so that Ubuntu can work on more hardware. They have been improving greatly, but they can definitely keep doing that.

I have been using this solution for at least four years. I use it every day.

It seems to be really stable for me. The cool thing is that it is a journaled system versus Windows in which a lot of things are written into memory. They've improved on this quite a bit. If your computer crashes in the middle of updates or something like that, you can still easily access and go back to maybe what it was before you tried the update. Another thing that is really cool is that you can upgrade an entire distribution version. You can upgrade from version 18.04 to 20.04.

A lot of web servers are probably running on some version of Linux, such as CentOS, and these web servers sometimes can go on for years without the need to be restarted. They are very resilient.

I am not really sure of a use case for scaling in Ubuntu. It is just an operating system. It is not like adding a server or something like that.

I haven't used technical support at all. I have always used stack overflow.

I was using Windows. I switched to Ubuntu because I was getting more into programming and I wanted something flexible.

With Windows, everything is loaded into memory when the operating system is started. Linux is a journaled system, which means that you actually have all of that RAM available to process applications and run your applications rather than just running the operating system. There are various things that I like about Linux in that regard. If the computer crashes, I literally can recover the documents. I know that this is now happening in Windows systems, but I used to see that a lot more in Linux.

The initial setup was very straightforward. If you have it set up on a bootable USB drive, you just put it in the USB drive and then you can just watch for a few steps. You don't even have to be very tech-savvy in order to install it and set it up. It doesn't take a lot of know-how.

It is open source, so it is free. There is no licensing fee.

I would recommend this solution if you want a good resilient system, flexibility, and control over your operating system. You can upgrade without having to pay or even turning off the computer. You don't need to shut it down and install upgrades. You can literally upgrade to a newer distribution while using the computer for the most part.

I would rate Ubuntu Linux a nine out of ten because there is always room for growth. 

We run our personal applications or non-mission-critical applications on Ubuntu Linux to cut the cost. 

The feature that I have found the most valuable is that it is open source. It is also very easy to manage. We can manage it ourselves.

It is an open-source tool, and it doesn't have any support. If there is an issue with the implementation of a feature, such as clustering, I am not sure how to resolve it and get support for it.

The stability of the vendor packages also impacts the stability of this solution. When vendor packages are unstable, or any packages are broken, they also impact Ubuntu Linux. It is very hard to resolve an issue related to unstable vendor packages.

I have been using Ubuntu Linux for three years.

It is stable. I didn't face any issues.

It is scalable. We have big servers on it. 

We have four to five people directly working on Ubuntu Linux. They are a part of the System Admin team.

I have used Kali Linux as well. If you want to go for an open-source solution, Ubuntu Linux is better. It is a bit better to use.

The initial setup was pretty straightforward. It took about 20 minutes. 

I implemented it myself. The deployment duration depends on the scenario. For small deployments, only one person is required.

We have on-cloud and on-premises deployments. I am working on the core features, and I haven't faced any critical issues with it. We use it for our non-critical applications. We don't use it for any critical applications, such as financial applications, because we do not get any official support for it. For critical applications, Red Hat is a better option.

I would rate Ubuntu Linux a nine out of ten.

With Web services, many DevOps require different configurations that could cause problems with each project's needs. We are able to supply a cheap, stable server that can cover the DevOps team, using standards we can apply very easily.

RTO with the use of templating support for VMware for fast deployment of recovery or new systems, with the least amount work needed on custom settings, within application installed from install repositories. Shorter overall time with the vetted packages. Normally install and go. Time from Dev to Prod has been reduced from months to weeks in most cases.

Each server has been installed to serve as a solution for a service needed. LAMP seems to be the most used package over all.

Stability of our systems has only improved since moving from CentOS to Ubuntu LTS.

Scale would normally be limited to the hardware. As with most Linux distros, HA packages for most apps are available in the repositories and many great support  forums with how-to's.

With the great support forums available, I have not needed to contact support as of yet.

We still have a mix of servers and must support our legacy systems that range from Red Hat, CentOS, and FreeBSD. As time goes, on we require more stable services with updated security, and we replace them with Ubuntu LTS to unify our systems to a standard that is easy to support and deploy.

With all the systems our network requires, this was one of easiest deployments thus far.

Many other Linux distros were selected for testing, but Debian core was very stable. However, the Debian distro itself was very annoying, missing many basic packages, and had little to no support for template deployment in VMware vCenter 5.5 to current.

We are a non-profit consumer with a small budget, hence the need for a stable, low-cost server to provide services to our users.

While I would recommend Ubuntu LTS (stable v16.04.3 at time of this review) try other distros to see how long it takes to deploy, and how much tweaking it will take to implement your project. 

I like it that Ubuntu is actually free and was one of the first with a decent hardware recognition during installation. It is still free, where some other distributions are no longer free and with a large and active community. A large community means that if you run into issues you have a place to find a solution or to help others.

I have used it professionally on some occasions but mainly to maintain the home network. Long Time Support has helped me to prevent regular updates on stable servers.

The Linux for desktop marketing could be improved but that is not only for Canonical/Ubuntu an issue.

How could these areas be improved? All parties (commercial, idealogical and non-commercial (I.e. the rest)) together could be a force to rekon with. But I do not think that there is a way to let them join forces. So, it is down to smaller initiatives to make people aware of the alternatives to Windows. Also, the required buying of Windows on each PC does not help. I think this is not helpful for IT as a whole.

I have used Linux for over 20 years now and Ubuntu for over 10 years.

It is rocksolid!

I did not run into scalability issues.

I used community support (and Google) for the issues I ran into and solved most within a short time.

I used other distributions, such as Slackware, Mandrake, Redhat, Debian and, of all of those, I like the way Ubuntu is setup the best.

The initial setup experience was the best of all other distributions and it was a smooth ride :)

Go for it if you need al Linux based server. Just start downloading it and using it. It is free.

I use Ubuntu Linux just for testing, e.g. as a workstation. I also use it for running some applications.

Ubuntu Linux is user-friendly. Patching and patch management for the system is also good.

The system is already user-friendly, but what could be improved is its ease of deployment. Its ease of use could also be improved.

I've been using Ubuntu Linux for more than five years.

From a stability perspective, Ubuntu Linux is quite stable. This is the reason I'm using it at home, e.g. for the lab. When I deploy it, it's quite stable, and I don't need to do anything else.

The initial setup for Ubuntu Linux was straightforward.

I implemented the system myself, and it took me less than an hour to deploy it.

The Ubuntu Linux version that I use is free. I just download it, install it on a VM, and that's it. It's because I don't require any support, so I don't need to pay.

I evaluated RedHat and Debian.

I have a personal experience with Ubuntu Linux in virtual machines.

The system can be deployed on-premises or on cloud, and this will depend on the testing required. We usually use the latest version of Ubuntu Linux.

I'm not using the system in a production environment, so its scalability is not something I care about.

I have not contacted technical support for Ubuntu Linux. I fix any issues myself, e.g. I go to their website and find the answers online.

I can certainly recommend Ubuntu Linux to other people who may want to start using it.

I'm rating Ubuntu Linux an eight out of ten.

We use the solution in the company where I work as an operating system. Whenever you are doing some serious development, you deploy this solution on a Unix platform.

The main feature of the solution is it has a command-line editor.

I find the solution could be easier to use, more flexible, user-friendly, and have a better UI.

In the future, I would like to see easier deployment.

I have been using the solution for a couple of years.

The solution is stable.

I have previously used Microsoft Windows and still do. I use this solution for personal use and when my work requires it.

The installation is easy and only takes approximately 15 minutes, but the process could improve.

I am using the free version of the solution.

I am going to continue using the solution and would recommend it to others.

I rate Ubuntu Linux a nine out of ten.

I primarily use it in my day to day work to test my products. There are a lot of open-source tools on the market, and I need this product to have something to deploy them on.

I prefer the new organization of Ubuntu. The repository is excellent.

They have provided a new interface, which is great. 

I don't need the UI so much as the CLI, however, both are excellent.

While for the most part, I am quite happy with the new developments on the solution, from my perspective (and as a user or a solutions architect), the product needs to keep on doing enhancements according to the needs sprouting out of recent developments in technology.

There should be a CI/CD process for all software that it is on the market.

Overall, the solution offers me exactly what I need. I'm not really missing any features.

You need a lot of bandwidth during the initial setup in order to pull from the repository. Without good bandwidth, you'll get cut off and the implementation will fail.

I've been using the solution for about four or five years.

The stability is good. Whatever I've needed to maintain, I've been able to on Unbuntu. It doesn't crash or freeze and it's not buggy. I find it to be reliable.

That said, they do have to look at their security measures and maybe tighten those up a bit.

I'm not sure about the scalability of the solution. It may be how you use the solution and how you set it up.

We're just a startup with a small team of maybe ten people. We aren't a big organization.

I'm familiar with many different options, including CentOS, Red Hat, and SUSE. I prefer Unbuntu out of all of these. However, it is a personal preference. Each has its own pros and cons.

The initial setup is not very complex although I wouldn't exactly describe it as straightforward. You need to have the right people on it. Those that understand the industry will have an easier time. Otherwise, it might not connect to the correct server and will get disconnected, causing the implementation import to fail. 

Countries that lack bandwidth need Unbuntu to offer a CAP server so they can pull off the repository and do updates and upgrades that won't fail if the bandwidth cuts.

Therefore, it's not necessarily the installation itself that gives you trouble. Unbuntu needs to get closer to the countries in order to make it easier to pull from the repository easily.

I highly recommend the solution. It's very popular among developers. It's worked quite well for us.

Of course, solutions like Red Hat and CentOS also have good capabilities. For us, however, Unbuntu is the best.

Overall, I'd rate the solution seven out of ten. It offers me basically everything I need and has worked well for our team.

Our primary use case is to have as an operating system, to install some applications.

The most valuable features are stability and updates. We are not using the interface, the interface of the OS, we are using it as the server. We actually sync it through SSH and we deploy our application, so we don't have access to do it. The updates are very helpful and the way they update their OS is very helpful.

I think the operating system is very stable and this is a major advantage.

We don't have any kind of support. We have our own skills here at the university and it's enough.

The ZFS needs improvement. They do an implementation of the ZFS storage that needs improvement. 

I have a few years of experience with Ubuntu Linux.

It depends more on the hardware layer, not on the operating system. If it can grow on the hardware, CPU memories, then we can put more stress on it. But usually, when we configure it, we configure it on the VM machine and then I start the OS and the application. When we want to expand, we create a new VM, and we start a new Ubuntu OS and we deploy another application. This is how we expand.

We have around 500 to 600 users. We are a university and we have a lot of staff here. 

We don't use any external support. 

The documentation is very useful with any kind of issues and we easily find a solution on the net variety suite. That is why also we choose Ubuntu. Because any kind of problem or any kind of implementation issue, we have a solution, we are able to find a solution on the net.

We usually acquire a solution application and then we deploy it. It is a matter of one hour or two.

I would recommend Ubuntu Linux. 

I would rate it an eight out of ten.