We can use the solution for building microservice applications.
Technical Manager at LTIMINDTREE
A flexible and user-friendly solution that performs well and can be easily updated
Pros and Cons
- "The solution is flexible and user-friendly."
- "The product must enable automation using AI."
What is our primary use case?
What is most valuable?
Ubuntu Linux is a nice product. I did not face any errors while installing the product. The product can be easily installed in VMware. It has different flavors. We can easily add patches. We can also update it easily. The solution is flexible and user-friendly. The performance is good. Everybody is moving to Hadoop. If we want to install Hadoop, Ubuntu is the best choice. We can install Hadoop on top of Ubuntu.
What needs improvement?
The product must enable automation using AI. It will be helpful for everyone. The product must provide flexibility for upgrading big data environments.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have been using the solution for a few years.
Buyer's Guide
Ubuntu Linux
May 2025

Learn what your peers think about Ubuntu Linux. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: May 2025.
856,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
The tool is stable.
How was the initial setup?
The initial setup is very nice. It is very user-friendly. It takes 20 to 30 minutes. To deploy the solution, I downloaded the ISO image and uploaded it to VMware.
What about the implementation team?
I installed the product myself.
What was our ROI?
The solution is very useful for installing big data. We can execute many processes.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
The solution is free.
What other advice do I have?
I recommend the solution to others. Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.
Disclosure: My company does not have a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer.

It at a manufacturing company with 10,001+ employees
A stable and free product that is easy to deploy and convenient to use
Pros and Cons
- "Ubuntu Linux is a convenient solution."
- "The product is difficult to use sometimes."
What is most valuable?
Ubuntu Linux is a convenient solution. I use it for file servers and web servers. I also use Linux for training purposes.
What needs improvement?
The product is difficult to use sometimes. We need to learn the commands before using the solution. It must be made easier to use.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have been using the solution for a few months.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
The tool is stable.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
The tool is not scalable.
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
Windows’ GUI is more convenient than Linux. I mostly use Windows Server. Sometimes, I use Linux. Windows Server is not free.
How was the initial setup?
The installation is easy. The settings are difficult sometimes. Many PCs do not have drivers for Linux. The solution is cloud-based.
What about the implementation team?
I deploy the product myself.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
The solution is free.
What other advice do I have?
The solution is the best for servers and some specific purposes. Overall, I rate the product a nine out of ten.
Disclosure: My company does not have a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer.
Buyer's Guide
Ubuntu Linux
May 2025

Learn what your peers think about Ubuntu Linux. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: May 2025.
856,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Founder and CEO at Applied Labs
Low-cost open source operating system with better security and quick support
Pros and Cons
- "This open source operating system promotes very secure environments with less possibility of being attacked. Support for this system is great because of its quick SLA."
- "Its interface could be improved and made richer."
What is our primary use case?
We started with Ubuntu Linux as our initial path to start developing our own software. If a customer wants us to manage a different technology for them, we can do that. For now, for new projects that are made from scratch, we use our own technologies, and those are built over Linux.
How has it helped my organization?
We have been able to create different platforms as an MSP for our customers.
What is most valuable?
Here's what I like most about Ubuntu Linux: the support we get from the factory, from the vendor.
I also find value in being able to test things with the community and learning more about the solutions that have been proven, so we can start to elaborate more and be able to pass to production more reliable information.
In the last five years, open source was not known, or it wasn't trusted much, but the industry knows that open source is the way to go as long as you work with the right vendor. Open source is here to stay, but it would always be dependent on the right partner, because there is a lot of open source software, but if they are not maintained, secured, or controlled, they are just like a train without a driver.
Based on all these, we love Linux, especially because of what we have learned in the last two months: We started to migrate customers from Microsoft SQL from Windows to Linux because the performance you can get from Linux with SQL from Microsoft, it's unparalleled.
You have more advantage from the power of Linux and you can cut off the cost of an operating system by using Linux with Microsoft SQL. We are starting to do that in the enterprise market because we believe that is a great step for them to reduce costs and to start making more powerful ETLs and queries, and faster processes, at a better price, because Linux is much more affordable.
Even in the Cloud, you'll find that a Windows instance is $400, while a Linux instance running SQL is $100 a month. It's a good thing here in Latin America, where we are going to start doing this. We are also seeing that there is a great opportunity in other countries in Europe.
We provide support for Red Hat, CentOS, and other distributions, but we have a solid relationship with Ubuntu Linux, with Canonical. We are a partner. With this solution, we are able to do more. We are able to explore a lot.
With Linux from Red Hat, we have been asked to manage, because in Peru, there were not many companies that had the knowledge to manage the workloads, but we prefer to use Canonical.
If a customer comes and asks us to manage their Red Hat Linux servers, we can definitely think about it because we have the skill. In our team, we have LPIC-1 engineers specialized in Linux so we can run any workloads over Linux.
Ubuntu Linux is very good.
There is a big advantage in security when using Ubuntu Linux that you will not have in the Windows environments short-term. When you have this relationship with Linux and you start working with very secure environments, there's less possibility of being directly attacked by a group of hackers. You will lose less data and you will have a more reliable ecosystem.
What needs improvement?
What I'd like to see included in the next release of Ubuntu Linux is for the interfaces to become richer, so they'll have the capability to absorb traditional and normal technologies.
For example, Canonical makes such high-end technologies to run and manage several servers at the same time, but they couldn't succeed because they were focusing all their efforts on just Linux-based systems.
If someone starts by providing things to assess and migrate the workloads you have in a data center where you have 200 to 300 Windows instances, you can provide some studies to these executive directors and say: "Today you're spending this money on licensing and operations, and you're getting 40% of your operational performance. If you start running Linux and you move your workloads into Linux, you'll be able to cut costs, and you'll get more out of your operational performance which you can present and provide data to your end customers more quickly and safely."
What we need to have is more tools to access the Windows environment of Ubuntu Linux, so we'll be able to say: "These are opportunities for your operational expenditure and cost cutting. These can help make your company better and allow you to provide more data to your customers more quickly."
Having more tools in the next release that can help provide information to executives: letting them know that there's money waiting in those opportunities for migration and change, is what I'd like to see.
For how long have I used the solution?
We've been using Linux for more than 10 years.
How are customer service and support?
Support for Ubuntu Linux is the reason I rated this solution a perfect score, because if you open a ticket, they will get to you quickly with the answers and information you need. For any subscription, it's good if you have a great SLA.
If you need a subscription and you need answers, go with Ubuntu Linux. If you have the right partner and you need an answer, your partner will always have it as well.
The support team always replies with the answers to your questions.
As an MSP, I reply within 10 minutes to my customers. I'm also basing this on other companies who are able to respond very fast to their customers' needs, so it depends on the kind of subscription and the SLA.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
The price of Ubuntu Linux is more affordable.
Which other solutions did I evaluate?
We evaluated CentOS and Red Hat.
What other advice do I have?
I have more than 20 years experience in providing MSP services for enterprises and the government.
We've been exploring the market. We are located in Peru, so we designed our own technology and we've been exploring a number of technologies from several providers. What we did was to create technology locally and based that technology on the best practices of several brands.
For example, we talked with Silver Peak, we talked with Fortinet and Juniper and other providers, because the major problem in the industry was the pricing and the licensing models. What we did was to create our own technology in Peru, then we provide this technology as a service, as a managed service provider. That's what we've been doing.
We provide the consultancy, then we provide the hardware, then we manage, but they don't need to buy it. They just need to rent it for the period of time stated on their contract, then we provide the full managed services for that.
We started as a hardware appliance on-premises, but the time and the conditions of the market forced us to start preparing a virtual cloud appliance because as Amazon, IBM, and other companies were using the Cloud, we started to make these laboratories to enable our device to pass through traffic over the Cloud, on any cloud. We started to use a virtual appliance. We started to use the Cloud.
Now, we have a hybrid model where some of our main devices are located in the Cloud, but we have a satellite and it's called a hub. This hub is installed on the local data center and its availability is found on several other providers. In this way, we can start and we can continue to monitor everything without experiencing loss, because sometimes data centers have this downtime.
We can keep working with other devices that are connected. We made a load balancing with DNS. We have a DNS solution that provides this, so it also responds to unavailability. If we have a problem, what we do is we keep tracking, monitoring, and providing KPIs for customers, and if something happens, we can respond within 10 to 15 minutes.
Many companies have a monitoring system. They can use PRTG. They can use free open source devices, but they don't have awareness. They have the monitoring systems, but they don't have time to remain seated to watch all those KPIs and sensors. What we did was to create an escalating model where the most valuable information our customer needs is the availability of their core systems.
We always take great care and we provide notifications not only about the downtime. It's not about the values because there is a big difference between a DDoS attack and just another load of our applications. We know those patterns. We're usually notified about anomalous patterns, security, etc. Today, in both the government and private sectors, attackers are scanning all the time. As we have an IDS solution, we are able to detect some anomalous patterns on the main sites and on the application.
In applications, we have developed IM (identity management) solutions. This software also tracks all the users getting into an application. When we notice that there is anomalous pattern, we're notified, so we block because we are using the zero-trust concept.
The zero-trust concept is a concept that makes us more reliable, because if you are a collaborator, or an employee, and you have a computer, a tablet, and a mobile phone, and you have access to our applications, we will know that you are not connected to your device trying to get into an application. We will ask you if you are the person trying to get in and we will authorize and permit you to get into an application through this identity access management solution that provides you access to the applications, but at the same time, we are providing you access to parts of the application you have permission to access.
This is a great accomplishment in Peru because we created something very competitive, in terms of Okta or AWS Cognito: it's their standard solution. We created that here in Peru, so we are trying to push this technology outside to make the people know about it. It's a mix of things because if you try to make just a firewall and start checking just the IDS and IPS, and you don't start checking the application itself, plus you don't start checking other patterns, you will have less information. What we are trying to do is to be more holistic on how a person works in the company to protect both their information and their access to the applications.
It's very holistic. We are mixing bare metal security. We are using a WAF (web application firewall) that we made here. It's a universal thing. At the same time, we are using the identity management platform. We made it for protection at that level. We are making several layers for the security, and also to provide the whole holistic pattern to our customers.
This is why our customers stay longer with us. Each customer we have today has been with us for more than five years, and they renew their contracts with us because they feel so comfortable with us, and we are well-trusted.
Customers just need to ask us if they can do something specific, if they can explore, because what we usually do and build for them are laboratories. We are making proof of concepts of new products because customers want to move forward and try new products. This is what enables us to keep the customers and have them renew their contracts, so they can move forward with new products. This is a good thing for us, and we are able to retain customers who have been with us in the last 10 years, for example.
We didn't experience many issues with Linux because we started using it early. The first solution I provided was 15 years ago, when we worked with a telco and this telco wanted to go to the enterprise market to sell IT services. What I proposed was to build a Platform as a Service to protect their information real-time. It's called continuous data protection. We installed all those in Linux.
We have extensive experience doing that and we started with data continuity for data centers. We started to replicate data a lot, even for a core bank located here in Peru. They were one of our first big customers and we had a five-year contract with them.
We didn't find many challenges at the beginning with Linux, because we started to build software over there, but then when we started to manage very big logs, we decided to build another software, in another instance, to start distributing the data and have more information and visibility for our customers.
We also developed a software over Linux to compress the traffic in transit. We made a lot of those. We didn't face any challenges because we have been working a lot with Linux.
We learned a lot. We learned how to build software over Linux and in several languages because we needed to build interfaces for end users. We also needed to build the backend. Our backend technology today has not yet been used a lot. We are using HTML technologies for the frontend. We have a team to do that. We also managed several, general things for any of our distributions. It depends on the function we would like to add to these appliances.
For example, for a network appliance, we are making our own distribution with Ubuntu Linux, but with some customizations to make it work lighter and easier on our dashboards. It's networking.
When we want to use Ubuntu Linux to develop software, we prepare those devices to run those workloads and make good backend servers and frontend servers. For example, for the IM (identity management) solution we made, we built it over Ubuntu Linux, but we are not yet using it at the backend. We are using the standard Open IDZ, but we made our own version for it to run effectively and be able to integrate this granular part of the permissions, because that is a simple way to make an identity management solution.
When you need to connect applications and provide granular permissions to the applications based on profiles and start from the FAP: If you have a new employee and this employee needs to have a lifecycle, plus permissions to applications, there is another integration we make with our software. We've been working a lot on that part to create this fully integrated software for identity management and application permission management. It's very nice.
The advice I would give to others who are looking into implementing Ubuntu Linux is that they need to start working with a partner. They need to start working with laboratories and start assessing. They need to start assessing what the company pain is because a few years ago we had been invited to talk for a country who was submerged in several taxes by paying Microsoft and some other companies with proprietary software. We saw that the companies in this country were spending a lot of money on Active Directory, SQL servers, and other technologies that the customers have been using for so many years. When we showed them how they can transform this into an open source technology package of assorted tools, and that they were easy to manage and to learn, they started to study it.
If a company wants to move forward with the world of Linux for improvements, savings, and start operating differently, they need to start working with a peer who has then done this for years, to make it aspirational, who would be able to tell them that they were using this technology, that they migrated their infrastructure and their solutions to open source, to Linux, because they needed to do that, and they succeed. They should start from there. They would want to start from laboratories and start passing to production the things that they can manage. First, with a partner, then they can run a team made up of people who can manage this new technology.
It's the right path. It's what they need to look at. If Microsoft didn't want to put SQL or Linux, they would be closing too many doors that they have today. Microsoft has grown bigger because they are open to the world of Linux. Microsoft has been saying that they are using Linux on the network and on other parts. It's the future. For example, we are using MongoDB. It's a great document database and doesn't have anything to do with SQL servers. They have no relation.
Companies need to explore. They need to start exploring new things and make these laboratories. If they start making these laboratories, they'll have opportunities to save money and make their operational performance better. They'll have a great migration to a new set of technologies.
Ratings for Ubuntu Linux will depend on the country and the culture. There are some companies who want to invest on the subscriptions. At the beginning, it would be best to invest on a partner instead of the subscription, because you'll really be able to take advantage of a subscription when you have an understanding of Linux. If you don't understand Linux yet, you should invest more in a partner who really knows about it, who can start traveling with you in this journey of migration.
Once you have everything up and running, that's the time you can select which subscriptions you need, but if you have a good partner, your partner will be able to give support about the subscription. Ubuntu Linux is the only one that doesn't need a subscription to work in an LTS version, unlike Red Hat and other distributions that where a subscription is mandatory. For Ubuntu Linux, you just need to buy a subscription on an LTS version in Canonical when you really need it.
I prioritized having a good partner first, then we went for a subscription to provide compliance to my operating systems that needed that compliance grade. You don't need to waste time and money in a subscription if you have the right partner on your side. There are two ways to look at this: the subscription cost and your partner who can manage everything properly.
Ubuntu Linux is a great solution, so if I'll rate it from one to ten, with one being the worst and ten being the best, it's a ten for me.
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?
Other
Disclosure: My company does not have a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer.
System Administrator at Figment Design Laboratories
Open-source with a great support community and seamless updating
Pros and Cons
- "It has improved our ability to carry out maintenance without downtime as migrating services between server environments is largely seamless."
- "On the desktop edition, we'd like more themes."
What is our primary use case?
I currently have the Ubuntu server edition installed across 200 Dell Servers running various projects, applications, and virtualization technologies. I have 70 Ubuntu Desktop editions running throughout my office, we have made a switch from Windows and will not be going back as the stability is incredible on an Ubuntu setup.
The installation is quickly done, the software is easily installed, and deployment can be automated across the workstation and server estates.
My support team also feels far more in control of their destiny when it comes to developing minor tools on the fly for their needs.
How has it helped my organization?
It has improved our ability to carry out maintenance without downtime as migrating services between server environments is largely seamless. Support for my users has become significantly easier as I can use Ubuntu tools to carry out the tasks on hand from a central location.
Ubuntu and other Unix operating systems have been community-driven so it's got tools that are community inspired and developed, with it being open-source, the cost is no longer a factor either and we can focus on providing the best possible solution to our customers.
What is most valuable?
There are far too many great features to mention, however, some are:
- Rsync for backups
- ZFS for snapshotting partitions
- LXD/LXC for containerization of services
- QEMU for Virtualisation of servers
- Seamless updating and upgrading
- Ansible for estate wide server administration
- Nagios for server monitoring
- Grafana with Prometheus/InfluxDB to provide metrics on performance
- LDAP for user management
These are only a few features that I make use of on a daily basis and from a sysadmin standpoint my life has become easier.
What needs improvement?
Ideally, I would like to have the following:
Server edition
- ZFS on the root (be able to natively install ZFS when carrying out the installation without hacking it together)
- Install grub at the start of the installation (it often can fail at the end of the installation causing some uphill but nothing major)
Desktop Edition
- More game support, specifically anti-cheat software is lacking support and hampering gaming on Linux
- More Nvidia GPU driver support
- Better WiFi driver releases from Intel
- More Themes
For how long have I used the solution?
I have been using Ubuntu server edition since 2010 and the desktop edition since 2011.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
I have 200 real servers running Ubuntu with close to 1400 containers/VMs running the same operating system and it's supported all by two people since there are so many well-thought-out tools and bugs/issues that have been ironed out.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
It can and has scaled almost endlessly in my environments. I have 200 servers running smoothly with long uptimes (the hardware has failed before the OS has).
How are customer service and support?
The Ubuntu and Linux community has been extremely helpful when it comes to issues we have experienced. Ubuntu logs data very well and it's often very self-explanatory how to resolve your issue if you do get stuck just pop onto the forums, post your issue and one of the gurus will have advice in no time.
How would you rate customer service and support?
Positive
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
We were making use of the Windows server edition for servers and Windows XP/7 for desktops throughout the organization.
We made the switch due to constant ransomware attacks, driver issues, and a lack of support from Microsoft in South Africa.
How was the initial setup?
The installation had a bit of a learning curve, however, thanks to their well-documented installation process on their website, once I got the hang of it we were off to the races.
Learning how to use the CLI was different, however, has become part of my daily driving of the OS.
What about the implementation team?
We implemented everything in-house and developed the tools required for our organization if there wasn't something available off the shelf.
What was our ROI?
It's a free solution; it's paid for itself in leaps and bounds.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
It's free and open source! Users should play and experiment to their heart's content and if they get stuck join the wonderful Ubuntu/Linux community to get the help you need.
Which other solutions did I evaluate?
We piloted with CentOS and RedHat, however, ultimately landed on Ubuntu as it was quickly rising in popularity and has become one of the most widely used in the world.
What other advice do I have?
The only way to get involved with Ubuntu is to dive in and embrace it; there is always a way to overcome your issue on a Ubuntu operating system.
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.
Principal Cloud Architect at a wholesaler/distributor with 1,001-5,000 employees
Reliable and easy package management
Pros and Cons
- "The most valuable features of Ubuntu Linux is the reliability, the ease of package management, and the ease of upgrading from one version to the next."
- "Ubuntu is putting great efforts into making their platform a great hosting platform for Kubernetes and other related tools, but they are not addressing the challenges with what it takes to run Ubuntu in a large Windows-based environment."
What is our primary use case?
We use Ubuntu Linux for deployments, infrastructure tasks, and for our developers. It is currently both on-prem and in the cloud. On-prem, there are a handful of machines and approximately 15 virtual machines in the cloud.
Most of the machines are somewhat tied to development purposes. We use it to host GitLab and an artifact repository. We also use it for mail relay to address some shortcomings in the exchange that we experience.
Ubuntu Linux is also used for Kubernetes and Docker development and production tasks. Most of the use cases of Ubuntu Linux are infrastructure related, with approximately 10 to 15 developers who also use it as a desktop.
For total number of users, there are 150 developers working with this solution and many more that use more specific services that are hosted on Ubuntu.
We plan to deploy a major application which will cater to all our testing and quality assurance people, which runs on Ubuntu on Linux.
What is most valuable?
The most valuable features of Ubuntu Linux is the reliability, the ease of package management, and the ease of upgrading from one version to the next.
With Ubuntu Linux you can set it and forget it. It requires low amount of administrative overhead.
What needs improvement?
I have certain misgivings about the policy of Ubuntu. They put business related packages into the universe branch of the distribution, which means that they will be upgraded without consideration for the package maintainer. Ubuntu Linux should put more of the applications and modules that are important for enterprise usage into the main branch, so updates could be more reliable.
Ubuntu is putting great efforts into making their platform a great hosting platform for Kubernetes and other related tools, but they are not addressing the challenges with what it takes to run Ubuntu in a large Windows-based environment. I recommend that Ubuntu Linux integrates more into active directory environments when it comes to authentication. There are solutions to make it run, but those are sometimes quite tedious, and it would be beneficial if Ubuntu Linux integrated more for large Windows-based environments.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have been working with Ubuntu since the first version was released.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
The product is stable.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
With respect to scalability of Ubuntu Linux, you can use the same version on a machine with one CPU and one gig of RAM, and you could move this machine to a different VM with 64 CPUs and two terabyte of RAM and you just have to start it. Yes, it scales very well
If you scale up the machine, it will be faster almost by the amount that you scale up. It will not be 64 times faster with 64 CPUs, but it'll be like 55 times faster with 64 CPUs than with one.
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
My background includes working with a variety of Linux and Unix versions ranging from IBM AIX, Oracle Solaris, and RedHat-based Linux Distributions. The environment had all the services that were offered by those machines streamlined in order to run only one distribution. It was a good experience for me, however others in the organization had concerns with running Linux.
How was the initial setup?
The initial setup of Ubuntu Linux is extremely easy. You cannot go wrong with the installation. Of course, you have to know a bit about Linux or Unix in order to know what you're doing.
What about the implementation team?
We implement in-house. I can manage, configure, and upgrade them all together and maintain them with two to three hours per week. That is all that is required to keep them running smoothly.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
We do not have any support agreements with Ubuntu, so we are using the free and open source version.
Which other solutions did I evaluate?
Ubuntu Linux is reliable, has easy package management and is easy to upgrade from one version to the next. Windows can not offer that. Ubuntu's deployments are easy with a very reliable machine, which Windows has shown that they can't do.
What other advice do I have?
If you are considering Ubuntu Linux, don't do it if you don't have knowledge of Linux.
I would rate this solution a 9 out of 10.
Which deployment model are you using for this solution?
Hybrid Cloud
Disclosure: My company does not have a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer.
Technician / Network & Systems Administrator, ITAS Program at a university with 1,001-5,000 employees
Versatile, highly-stable, and the best-supported one by the community
Pros and Cons
- "I like the fact that I can make it very secure with my own knowledge, which makes it different from Windows that does things in the background by magic, and you hope that it's secure. I like the availability of starting with Linux with totally minimal permissions for anybody and then increasing it on an as-needed basis. This is probably the most important to me."
- "The biggest improvement, which is also applicable to Linux in general, with Ubuntu Linux is getting things standardized as to where you're going to put your configuration files and how they're going to work. Package names also need to be improved so that the package name doesn't have any match with configuration file systems and things like that. Ubuntu is still better than some of the others, such as Red Hat Linux or CentOS."
What is our primary use case?
It is mainly a LAMP server with Apache, MySQL, PHP, and other things for the students to do their web development stuff. It's all done up with LDAP capabilities of getting into it. The web server side is open to the internet, so they can sit at home, VPN in, and do all their work. They can actually see what the public-facing side ends up looking like. Then we've got our main learning management system because we do our own self-hosted Moodle instance kind of thing. It's all running on a Linux server and doing well. Our DNS servers and things like that are all separate. Two of them are internet-facing, and one of them is internal.
I am very close to its latest version. I try and stick to using the long-term release versions, like every second year when they release the new long-term release one. So, I have some servers that are actually on 20.04, but I've got a web server at home that's on 16.04. I've got Nextcloud and things like that on that server, so I'm afraid to do a full load upgrade on it because I don't want to break anything. That's why I wish I had it set up as a virtual machine that I could take a snapshot of and blow it up and go, "Oh, okay. I'll revert." We can't do that with the hardware box.
In terms of its deployment, at work, I do everything on-premises in VMware vSphere itself. I work with the IT program at the university. It is an Applied Systems one, so it is a two-year diploma program. I've got a whole bunch of different servers set up for them, and it is a mix. Our domain itself is with Active Directory, and everything is Windows, and then just about everything else is running on Linux servers. Our VPN is also Windows because it makes it simpler for users to connect easily. You don't have to download keys and install them and then be able to talk to OpenVPN properly.
What is most valuable?
I like the fact that I can make it very secure with my own knowledge, which makes it different from Windows that does things in the background by magic, and you hope that it's secure. I like the availability of starting with Linux with totally minimal permissions for anybody and then increasing it on an as-needed basis. This is probably the most important to me. That's where I also love CentOS for Linux because you do a minimal install, and then there is a whole bunch of stuff you can't do without installing packages, which is quite nice in some ways and painful in other ways.
I like the versatility of it. When I first started here, which was like eight years ago, we were running some stuff as virtual machines inside a Linux host instead of doing it with VMware. Then we finally got VMware licensing, but before that, we were doing some virtual machines within Linux itself, and it was working quite well.
What needs improvement?
The biggest improvement, which is also applicable to Linux in general, with Ubuntu Linux is getting things standardized as to where you're going to put your configuration files and how they're going to work. Package names also need to be improved so that the package name doesn't have any match with configuration file systems and things like that. Ubuntu is still better than some of the others, such as Red Hat Linux or CentOS. For example, in your named server, the package itself will be BIND 9, but then the configuration files are in etc/named, and the service is called named. Why isn't the package name matching up? Little things like that prevent it from getting more mainstream use from everyday users. They should standardize things between different distributions and even inside the single distributions. You can't expect people to adopt it as your desktop system if you do weird things. It is great for us Linux nerds, and we can deal with it, but you can't expect your general public to just be able to jump in and say, "Oh, it's like this here, but it's not like it there."
For how long have I used the solution?
I've been using it for probably 10 years.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
Its stability is great. You turn it on, and it runs. I do have a couple of these that do automatic updates for the important stuff. I just get an email telling me that this is being updated so that I can check and make sure everything is okay, which is always the case, but it is worth checking anyway. You can back out of the updates fairly easily, unlike Windows that magically does things. I don't mind that in general, but you never really know what it is doing. It just says, "Oh, here are your updates. You've got these six things." You can't pick just one to update. You've just got to say, "Yeah, go ahead and update," and then hope it doesn't blow up in the meantime.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
I've never really scaled things up much. Usually, I pick a system and make it a certain size and availability. I've done it with virtual machines where I've increased drive space and things, but I've never really done the scalability side to where it can boost up another server to take a load off. I'd love to try it, but I've never had a situation where I really needed it.
In general, we have probably about 50 users at a time. It is not a huge number, but in terms of usage, it is extensively used. Ubuntu is just about everything other than the basic Windows domain stuff. Domain controllers and VPN are all we've got on Windows currently.
Our situation right now is just right. I've got Jitsi Meet, which is a video conferencing type server, and I might increase capabilities there. In general, I don't think we're really going to expand much, but you never know in this day and age how much things change in IT. At one time, we were doing OpenStack ourselves, and I told people, "Yeah, we're competing with Amazon Web Services, but only at this little level." Finally, it got changed out anyway because they kept changing it so much.
How are customer service and technical support?
I've never dealt with their tech support.
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
I personally used CentOS Linux quite a bit during most of our learning years in the IT program. Red Hat was kind of your big standard out there at the time. When I came into this job, because there were only a few things, what we had was really just Ubuntu Server. As we did bigger upgrades, I eventually started changing them and replaced the CentOS ones with Ubuntu ones just to standardize. They were kind of bouncing around at the time, and I don't like bouncing around too much.
I'm just about to do a project and try and switch that over to Windows. There is some stuff that I like with the Linux one, but I'd much rather manage it in Windows because it is much easier where you just say, "Add this host," and it's done. It is magic. It happens and updates everything and stuff. I don't have to go and remember to change the serial number. My biggest problem is that I'll make changes and save them, but nothing happens, and I go, "Why?"
How was the initial setup?
The installation is very straightforward for the desktop and the server. It comes up with that nice setup. I love the fact that you can take it off a USB stick as a live distribution, and then do your install and actually click the stuff that you would like it to install automatically, or you can wait until it's done as long as you know what you want to install. I do find it quite good.
For its maintenance, one person is required. I do it all. It's funny when we get our IT section to come down and give a briefing on how our whole IT department for the university works, and they talk about server group, networking group, project management group, etc. When they're finished, I go to the students, and I say, "So for the ITAS program itself, see all that on the board? That's me."
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
It is 100% free.
What other advice do I have?
I love using it. I'm strictly on the server-side. I've got a laptop with Ubuntu Desktop on it because we teach it here, so I might as well make sure I'm still playing with that a little bit once in a while, but I'm mainly on the server-side.
It is the best-supported one by the community. I still recommend it to anybody who asks me, "What should I do here?" It's nothing about our current CentOS turning into rolling releases, which has 14 million people in an uproar because they think, "Well, it has always been so stable without rolling releases. Why would you change it?" That doesn't bother me at all. I just look at that community being out there, whether it's Stack Overflow, Ubuntu forums or web pages, etc. There is just 10 times more information available for Ubuntu, which sometimes is harder to filter through. You'll get somebody's answer, but it's from a five-year-old distribution that isn't supported anymore, and it doesn't work that way anymore, but I do think the community itself is great.
I'm going to give Ubuntu Server a 10 out of 10 because it is so stable. I never had any issues with it in terms of stability. Even when I've done big upgrades where you got lots of stuff on an individual server and lots of different things going on, and you say, "Okay, do this distribution upgrade because it should be stable," it always works out. I've got one at home that I'm kind of scared to upgrade. I don't think I'll have a problem with it, but I'm kind of scared to do it anyway, just in case.
Disclosure: My company does not have a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer.
DevOps Engineer at Integrity
Easy to use and offers good documentation
Pros and Cons
- "There's ample documentation available for most features, and I find it straightforward to use."
- "Stability could be improved."
What is our primary use case?
I built some application servers on it, like Wi-Fi. I also use it for configurations of servers.
What is most valuable?
I like that it is free.
There's ample documentation available for most features, and I find it straightforward to use.
What needs improvement?
Stability could be improved.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have been using it for several years.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
I would rate the stability a nine out of ten.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
I don't need the scalability aspect.
There are around 10 end users using this product in our company. There are around 40 servers of Ubuntu servers in my company.
How are customer service and support?
We don't need the support. We can easily find answers on the internet.
How was the initial setup?
The initial setup is not complex.
What about the implementation team?
I usually can do it by myself. For the deployment process, I created some virtual machines because I usually use some virtual machines for my servers. After that, I downloaded the appropriate image of Ubuntu and deployed it.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
It's free. I haven't paid for a license. And we can manage all our servers by ourselves.
What other advice do I have?
Overall, I would rate the solution a ten out of ten. I would recommend using the product.
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.
Embedded Engineer at a engineering company with 11-50 employees
A stable solution that is free of cost and provides good customer support
Pros and Cons
- "I use Ubuntu Linux to update some drivers related to some of my work."
- "Ubuntu Linux does not easily detect the drivers of new devices, and you need to do some trial and error for some of the third parties porting into it."
What is most valuable?
I use Ubuntu Linux to update some drivers related to some of my work.
What needs improvement?
Windows can automatically detect the drivers of new devices, and you can easily use them in the Windows system. Ubuntu Linux does not easily detect the drivers of new devices, and you need to do some trial and error for some of the third parties porting into it.
Ubuntu Linux should improve its embedded hardware so that users can work easily. In order to use multiple embedded devices with Ubuntu Linux, I need to add some device drivers.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have been using Ubuntu Linux for three to four years.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
Ubuntu Linux is a stable solution.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
Around three to four people are using the solution in our organization.
How are customer service and support?
The solution's technical support is good. We get quick answers to our queries on Ubuntu forums.
How would you rate customer service and support?
Positive
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
We switched from Windows to Ubuntu Linux because of the cost. If I want to buy a Windows license, it will take thousands of rupees in Indian currency, but Ubuntu Linux is free of cost.
What about the implementation team?
The solution's installation hardly takes a few minutes, depending on the software size.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
We are using Ubuntu Linux free of cost, and there is no licensing.
Which other solutions did I evaluate?
Before choosing Ubuntu Linux, I evaluated other options like CentOS. I felt Ubuntu Linux was good compared to other solutions in terms of support.
What other advice do I have?
Overall, I rate Ubuntu Linux a nine out of ten.
Disclosure: My company does not have a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer.

Buyer's Guide
Download our free Ubuntu Linux Report and get advice and tips from experienced pros
sharing their opinions.
Updated: May 2025
Popular Comparisons
Oracle Linux
Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL)
Rocky Linux
Windows Server
SUSE Linux Enterprise
CentOS
openSUSE Leap
Windows 10
Windows 11
Oracle Solaris
Kali Linux
Debian
Alpine Linux
Flatcar Container Linux
Google ChromeOS Flex
Buyer's Guide
Download our free Ubuntu Linux Report and get advice and tips from experienced pros
sharing their opinions.
Quick Links
Learn More: Questions:
- Which would you choose - Ubuntu Linux or Oracle Linux?
- What operating system will be a good alternative for SLES?
- Oracle Linux or RHEL; Which Would You Recommend?
- What change management solution do you recommend for users to adapt to Windows 10 updates?
- What operating system do you use in your business?
- When evaluating Enterprise Linux, what aspect do you think is the most important to look for?
- What is the best Windows MSI installer?
- Which operative system would be a good alternative for DevOps?
- What features do you look for in an operating system?
- What operating system will be a good alternative for SLES?