Ubuntu Linux Reviews

We primarily use the solution for data storage. 

The data storage capabilities are great.

We love the fact that this solution is open-source. It's free to use.

The product can scale.

The solution is stable. 

The solution is easy to install.

I can't really speak to any missing features.

There are some costs on offer that could be lower.

The learning curve is quite high for non-technical users. Therefore, it's not a suitable solution for a general office environment.

I've been using the solution for five years. It's been a while, although I don't use it too much.

The stability is very good. We have found that there aren't any bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable.

The solution is quite scalable. If you need to expand it, you can do so as a company. 

It's the base of our data platform. 70,000 people are using it. The IT team alone is 5,000 to 6,000 people. 

I've never dealt with technical support directly. I can't speak to how helpful or responsive they are, as I have never called them for assistance.

We have two major operating systems: Microsoft and Linux. 

The solution is quite straightforward and easy to install. It's not too complex or difficult. However, I cannot speak to how long it takes to deploy.

The solution is open-source. I'm not sure if we pay for any licensing or services and if we do, I am not sure of the exact costs. It's not a part of my responsibilities.  

We use both cloud and on-premises deployment methods. 

I'm not sure which specific versions we are using and if they are the latest or not. 

I'd rate the solution at a nine out of ten. We've been quite satisfied with the product so far. It's been great.

I'd recommend the solution to other users and companies. I wouldn't recommend it if you were deploying it as an office environment, however, for the data platform, it's perfect.

It can be used to write an application that is for all kinds of users to operate as an independent application.

Ubuntu Linux is flexible because it has a lot of new features, so you can use it without any problems.

It is a stable, open source solution as well.

You have to do a lot of configurations yourself. It is not very user friendly, but if you wanted to be a technical person, you may use it. However, you may still have a lot of difficulty with the configuration.

They could make more automations for the average user.

I've been using it for 6 months.

I have never had problems with stability.

The installation is straightforward, but you have to study beforehand. It isn't as straightforward as Windows is. You have to know some things you have to do.

It took about two hours, but it could be higher than that because we had to check for things. We didn't need a lot of reboots as compared with Windows, but I had to decide a lot of technical things during the installation.

It's an open source solution, but you can make donations if you'd like to.

On a scale from one to ten, I would rate Ubuntu Linux at eight and would recommend it to those would like to implement it.

For average users, I would recommend Windows because it's the system most people use. If they are gamers, they will not find any game applications, as Ubuntu Linux is mostly for developers.

We use the solution for our Linux servers. 

We use it for file transfer and remote desktop connections.

The solution is very simple.

I like that it doesn't get corrupted as easily as Windows. When it comes to viruses, it's more secure.

Especially on laptops, it doesn't drain much battery.

The solution is straightforward to set up.

It's faster than Windows.

When you talk of some of the flexibility, like you want to install from scratch, Windows is more user-friendly compared to Linux. Linux is more for the more techie people. You have to go through a terminal, a prompt to do some setup, and other things. Windows offers more help for you when you install it.

I've been using the solution for more than five years at this point. 

I haven't gone through scalability. It's more for an individual setup in my case. However, they're supposed to be much faster than Windows.

We only have a couple of people using it in our organization, as most actually use Windows. 

We don't use technical support. We have our own team and we learn as we go on our own.

I've also used Windows. I prefer Linux over Windows. We're doing some testing where we hope that we can put some applications in Linux eventually. We're testing Docker and similar solutions.

It's very similar to Windows 10 in terms of installation. If you're using a desktop, then more or less you can find those commands in Windows Servers as well. However, for Linux, it's a bit more in its own process. Linux is good on its own. The difference with Windows is Windows would require a lot of licensing, and their applications slow down.

When you install it, it's easy. However, there are some applications for which you have to look for help online. There are commands that you can use to be able to install them.

If you compare it to Windows, Windows is basically straightforward. It's easier to install Windows than Unbuntu Linux. When you talk servers, when you talk of workstations, Windows is a bit faster. The way I see it, we do have to do some settings, however, when you're able to run the installation properly, Linux ends up being much faster to run as the boot time is a few seconds faster, and shutdown time is much, much faster.  

Unlike Windows, which you have to pay for, this solution is free for the most part. We don't use it too much and therefore do not incur much of a cost.

Licensing is basically just for some applications. You get licenses if you want them to support you for Linux. For Ubuntu, you don't pay licenses. You pay for the support if you want them to support you.

We may have evaluated other options, however, it was a long time ago. 

For Linux, we're using Ubuntu. We have set up everything using Ubuntu. We do have some servers with Oracle Enterprise Linux. Those are running inside our HP DL380 servers. And then I do have Linux Mint and Elementary OS on my laptop and in my desktop at home.

I use multiple versions of the solution, including 20.04, 18.04, and 16.04.

We do have so many players in the Linux field. You do have Canonical, and they have their own Linux. Then, you have others that are based on Ubuntu. Ubuntu is based on the Debian model. You also have, on the other side, Red Hat and the SUSE Linux, which is IBM Linux. There are different providers, however, the core is almost the same. It's more of the setup that is available for you.

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten.

We mostly use the Ubuntu 14 version, although this varies from one customer to the next. We always utilize the latest stable version when embarking on a new project. 

We use the solution for application development and integration. We employ it as an e-commerce solution or when writing a connector between two systems, such as for website development. 

The trifecta comprising the solution's most valuable features consists of its stability, security and performance.

A problem we have encountered when installing the package is that certain packages are not available, which requires downloading of them on our part. As such, the solution should have a better repository of packages. Otherwise, one must download them from a third party slide. However, as I am not involved in the monitoring aspects, DevOps or Linux, I am probably not the best person to comment on this. 

From an end-user perspective it would also be nice to see better support and guidance when concerning the installation process, better training facilities when it comes to the solution's use. 

There is also a need to rely on third party websites for information which concerns the setup and it would be good if it were synthesized in such a way that the user could comfortably learn it autonomously. 

I have been using Linux for nearly 15 years, since around 2005. I am accustomed to its use, as would most people who have familiarity with Kibana Linux. At this level it is of no consequence. We get the installation package and this should be readily available. 

The solution is stable. Windows crashes all the time. Ubuntu Linux is definitely stable by comparison. 

While I cannot comment on the ability to scale the solution on-premises, I can say that this is very easy to accomplish on-cloud. It is now much easier than it used to be. 

I have not had much contact with technical support, not recently at any rate. I now work as an architect and don't come in contact with the support team. I work mostly with our team when it comes to assisting with the setup of Linux. 

The initial setup of the solution is a bit complex when compared with Windows, but there is a learning curve involved. Nobody can start using Linux straight off the bat, as a certain amount of expertise or skill is required. This said, if one has the right people for the job, ones who are acquainted with the solution, then this shouldn't pose a challenge. Docker now makes it easier than ever to deploy anything one wishes on Linux, particularly when it comes to Kubernetes. 

While I cannot state definitively how long the deployment takes, as I have not done it in a while, by and large I would say that this is not a time consuming process. Installation should range from a half-a-day to one day. If the main application on one's Docker is up and running, this process can be completed very quickly. So, the initial time-consuming step would involve creating the Docker file. 

Once installed, the product does need some monitoring and there are five CPUs involved in this process. In terms of Linux and cloud, there is also a need to keep track of the cost. These are the security and performance aspects which require monitoring. 

I am not in a position to comment on the licensing, as we mostly make use of the free version. 

Our company has over 14,000 employees and this makes it difficult for me to give a hard and fast number of how many use the solution, although I would estimate that 70 percent do so for development purposes. 90 percent of our employees use Windows 10 on their personal computers. 

I would recommend this solution for development and production purposes for the simple reasons that it is free, stable, secure and shows good performance. These are the four things that I am looking for. 

I rate Ubuntu Linux as a seven out of ten. 

The solution is very lightweight and extremely powerful. You can do almost anything you want to do with these systems. You don't have any limitations. For example, for Windows, there's a limitation where you can't run microservices with Docker.

Docker only runs on Linux as it is actually using the Linux channel. If Microsoft can make the Linux Subsystem for Windows run Docker it would be good. Docker and microservices are the future of everything we are doing. Using Docker and microservices is the best - and it works well on Ubuntu.

For the moment, Ubuntu actually it's installing its own philosophy which according to me is so good.

The solution is always adding more features. 

The solution has great functionality and it's easier to use than Oracle or Windows.

Occasionally, we have problems with stability. They prefer functionalities over stability sometimes compared to Debian. For Debian, they prefer stability over functionalities - they don't make a run on new technologies. They stabilize, they implement the most stable versions that they can. 

Depending on the stability you require on your server, you might prefer going for Debian over Ubuntu. If it is implemented in servers where stability is not really a big deal then you go with Ubuntu as you likely need new features. 

We find that the stability isn't that great. They have opted to keep adding new features and functionalities, and due to the fact that it's always evolving, it's not as stable as a solution that is pretty static.

I use Debian as well. I prefer Debian, however, I also like Ubuntu. Ubuntu is like Debian. Ubuntu is from Debian. I'm also familiar with the Windows Server, and I find that Unbuntu is more flexible and has more potential in terms of how we need to use it. 

We currently use the open-source version of the product.

We do a lot of configurations for the community. We don't have a partnership with Canonical. We use the open-source solution.

I'd rate the solution at a nine out of ten. We've been very satisfied with the solution's capabilities. Compared to Windows, it's very good.

We are using this solution in my organization as a software development platform.

Ubuntu Linux is a very good platform for software development. If you want to deploy dependencies for a particular software on Ubuntu it is probably the easiest. If you compared it to Red Hat or any other distribution of Linux, getting the dependencies and other configurations in place is quite a hassle. We have saved time by using this solution.

Ubuntu Linux is very easy to learn, manage, and keep updated.

The solution is a little complicated to customize and could be made easier.

In a future release, the implementation of lightweight desktops and remote access for server platforms could be improved.

I have been using this solution within the past 12 months.

The solution is stable.

Ubuntu Linux is scalable. However, there could be better documentation to assist in scalability in many areas, such as PCP scanning.

We have approximately 40 people using the solution in my organization. We have plans to increase usage in the future.

It is not very difficult for us to find support for Ubuntu Linux by ourselves since we have already been using it for many years. We generally do not need support from anywhere.

The installation is easier than any other solution.

We did the implementation ourselves.

The solution is free.

I have evaluated other distributions of Linux, such as Red Hat.

I would recommend this solution to others. For those thinking about whether they should try out the solution, I would advise them to go ahead and give it it try.

I rate Ubuntu Linux a nine out of ten.

We use this solution for our NFS environment. I'm a system administrator and we're customers of Ubuntu Linux. 

Compared to other solutions on the market, this is a relatively suitable and good product which is stable and easy to use. Ubuntu currently serves our OpenShift environment.

The product could be better. It lacks the ability for disk expansion and is not very suitable for our needs. I also think support could be improved thereby simplifying installation. 

I've been using this solution for six months. 

The solution is stable. 

If I need to increase the disk on Ubuntu it's just hard for us to increase in the environment so scalability is not so easy. 

We don't pay for technical support so we can't use it in Turkey. 

I've used Red Hat Enterprise and I prefer working in that enterprise environment so I prefer that solution. 

If you have two different versions, one version can't be installed on the VMware environment. It is not suitable. I carried out the deployment myself and it took quite some time and a while to understand the program. We have an admin person and an engineer dealing with Ubuntu. 

Red Hat Enterprise is very widespread in Turkey and very few use Ubuntu. I work in an enterprise environment and I prefer Red Hat Enterprise Linux because we can easily get support. Red Hat is very widespread and Red Hat support is very responsive. I don't think I would recommend Ubuntu for anyone working in an enterprise environment. I think we'll be shifting to Red Hat at some point. 

I would rate Ubuntu Linux a six out of 10. 

I'm using it for a file server and for MySQL servers. Those are my primary uses.

The solution is easy to install and easy to update.

You can scale the solution quite well.

The solution has a bit of a learning curve. It's not too high, however, you do need to understand the solution to deploy it and work with it effectively.

I've used the solution for a while. I've used it extensively in the last 12 months at least, and over the last two years in general.

The stability is mostly pretty good. The only issue with stability was with power knocking out, and therefore I put a UPS on it. That seemed to solve any issues going forward. It doesn't crash or freeze. There are no bugs or glitches. It's quite good now.

Linux offers very good scalability potential. If a company needs to expand it, it can do so.

I just use the solution for personal use. I don't have a big team using it.

I've never used technical support in the past. I can't speak to how helpful or responsive they are.

While I've been a Mac person since the Mac first came out in 1984, I've added Linux for my server items. I didn't really switch to anything else; I've just added onto what I already do.

It's an operating system and when you install an operating system new, there are all sorts of things you have to go do and go read up on such as how do I do this and how do I do this? For me, it went very, very well, however, it's not something I can do in an afternoon. It took several days to get everything proper. However, it went well so there are no complaints at all in terms of the initial setup.

I can't speak to Unbuntu versus Red Hat or other Linux solutions, however, I am aware that some people use them.

I'm using the solution more for myself. I'm just an end-user. I don't have a business relationship with Linux.

I'm using the latest stable version. If they publish a stable version and then they publish an experimental option, I won't use it. I'll stick with the stable option. 

It's not something that you run on the cloud. It's what's behind cloud services. I've got an Ubuntu machine at home that I use regularly, but it is also my MySQL server and a file server, all in one box.

FileMaker, I know very well and MySQL, I'm learning quickly. Linux, I'm a beginner admin on it. I'm not in a position to make any comments pro or con enough, as I don't know enough about it to make a valid comment.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten. I've been very happy with it.

I use Ubuntu Linux for server administration and to manage network traffic. I set up a Linux server and router with all traffic through ease. I could limit the band rate limits of users in university. These are the main use cases. I also used Ubuntu with ZoneMinder Software. It's open-source software and we use about 700 CCTV cameras, which are IP-based. We deployed this on our servers for use on our own two operating systems. Other use cases include using it with the base cloud. I set up an openness patch on the Ubuntu Operating System. I'm familiar with Bash Scripting, Python Scripting, and the system programming in C and C++, but C and C++ programming languages are not my recent activities. Most of my working system is Linux Scripting or with Python. Actually, I'm recently working with Ansible to automate my jobs and my Linux experiences. Ubuntu provides for all of these activities. I also used it for OpenStack.We are hosting providers and a service company. Half of our services are based on CentOS, but they are going to migrate to Ubuntu as they are using services that Ubuntu provides. We are going to use Ansible to manage Ubuntu servers using the provided automation. We have been deploying OpenStack in an industrial IT company in Iran and now we are going to add special storage as a block device for our private cloud in Iran.

Many years ago, I used to compile Linux Kernels and operating systems. In those days, I had a lot of problems with compiling from scratch and it was so time-consuming. When I got a job in the industry, I faced new problems. So I found that may be using a new operating system may be a way forward, and that is how I came to start using Ubuntu. Performance, security and manageability are my main reasons for choosing Ubuntu. For performance, I can tune as needed. The security aspect has good features and support. There is a free security bug system. This is really good and helpful for the organization, to identify any security issues in the system. We have about 20 to 200 users in our company. Most of them use Ubuntu as a base system and all of, or may actually half of our servers are Ubuntu based. We use OpenStack code, and we have a data centre with about 150 servers of DL306 HP and set up Ubuntu on them.

There are many good automation features in Ubuntu. For example, there is a new version of Netplan Fortune which is a network manager and it is very good at managing a network of virtual machines. Ubuntu is optimized, which makes it really nice, as we can optimize Ubuntu as much as we want. For example, I had a good experience in traffic management, as I could optimize the system and Linux to make it efficient. Ubuntu is easy to obtain information for because there is a lot of documentation, and there is also a large community where you can have questions answered. Linux systems like Ubuntu and Centos enable you to work quickly, and easily. This includes installing a lot of programs, easily, as and when you need them. For example, when we are deploying the OpenStack operating system, we can use many sources, such as Galera Cluster. All of these packages are pre-compiled and pre-deployed on operating systems like Ubuntu.

The new releases of OpenStack are much faster than Ubuntu. However, the commitment of the OpenStack project is not supported in Ubuntu in the first instance. If the Ubuntu community can package and manage new releases of OpenStack packages, it will be really good. Management monitoring and interface could be better. I also feel it could be improved overall in terms of the dashboard, technical support, pricing, stability, scalability, and performance. They could try to package more new releases of OpenStack, and that would be much better.

Personally, I have been working 15 years in Linux including a role as a Linux System Administrator. I have experience in Linux concepts including system programming and cloud computing recently. I also know about storage systems. OpenStack is the last thing I have been working on, deploying to the cloud about 5 years ago. It is the main product I've been working with. I do not have experience in Red Hat Operating System, but Debian, Ubuntu, Census are the main operating systems I have been working with.

The stability of Ubuntu is good. The most important aspect is that you can use the LTS versions of Ubuntu. We can have upgrades of software for many years and obtain support from Ubuntu. Stability is important for a Linux administrator In general Ubuntu or even CentOS does not have any problems with stability and you can use it for many years. I have used it for 3 or 4 years continuously and I did not encounter a serious issue at that time.

I have set up and deployed Ubuntu with Ubuntu MAAS installation. This was a very useful service that Ubuntu offered to us. I deployed my server with my coworkers and we set up many operating systems at the data centres within a few minutes. Scalability in terms of a service layer is really good. You can install and deploy on many different types of hardware. Most of my experiences are setting and deploying Ubuntu on HP generation of 7, 8 and 9 servers, from the DL38 server, HP DL38 to DL36, 316 servers. We use it as much as we want. Regarding the scalability of Ubuntu, most of our coworkers are using Ubuntu as client servers. They are based in Iran. Ubuntu-based operating systems are really popular in Iran.

As we are in Iran and because of sanctions, we don't have a support opportunity. So we try to use it to learn what we can and consult the documentation. We don't have technical support here and we have to support it ourselves. I'm using most of my time to read the documentation and fix problems. We don't have technical support in Iran because of sanctions.

I have previously been involved with Centos. My most experience is in private clouds, and I've been deploying Ubuntu Linux and OpenStack. I set this up at the Ferdowsi University of Mashhad for high-performance computing. However, that was about five years ago. Last year in my new company, I deployed OpenStack for a public cloud. And we are going to use it for some of our customers.

Also, partitioning and deploying Ubuntu in the cloud is really simple and easy. We create a base image of Ubuntu or maybe use a pre-built image built in Asia from ubuntu.com to our cloud. I have a lot of experience from many years ago installing Ubuntu and partitioning using LVM partitioning. For example, Ubuntu supports several files systems for use with products such as Excel. These are the main file systems I use in Ubuntu and LVM management in Ubuntu is really simple. Ubuntu installation is really simple, even for newbie users. The installation of drivers can sometimes be difficult, but otherwise, it is an easy setup.

I prefer to use an open-source license rather than proprietary licenses. Ubuntu is very well documented. It is also manageable and financially affordable.

We previously evaluated Centos and OpenStack.

Ubuntu has improved driver support and the installation of Ubuntu is really fast and easy. I recommend it to everyone. I would recommend Ubuntu over any other operating system. Ubuntu is useful for a variety of challenges, and issues. I would rate Ubuntu as 9 out of 10. It has good support and can be deployed on a cloud such as OpenStack. Ubuntu thinks about its customers and really helps them to achieve what they want. The freely available support resources of Ubuntu are really good. The good use of documentation and community forums are the major things that Ubuntu has succeeded. Ubuntu has done a good job of supporting their releases of lifetime services. I think it's a little bit better than CentOS.

The solution provides digital use for end users. I'm the director of the company and we are customers of Ubuntu. 

Ubuntu has better security and better production in comparison to Microsoft Windows and the hardware performance is better than Microsoft. The best feature of the solution is the auto upgrade operating system we get as a support from Ubuntu. The solution is good on the support level in several aspects; the web server, database management, security management, and viral management. Ubuntu is great on all of these.

The product currently lacks interoperability with other operating systems like Windows. This means that it's not possible to integrate with some of the popular Windows applications  such as accounting, tax, financial accounting and bracket improvement. I'd also like to see a lighter version of this solution. 

I've been using this solution for 15 years. 

This is a stable solution. 

This is a scalable solution. We are a 15-person team using the product but we have deployed for organizations which have 100+ users. We use a three or four person engineering team for deployment. We plan to increase usage of this product. 

We have hardly needed to contact technical support. The solution has good documentation and a community forum for support.

I've been using Red Hat and CentOS but I'm not comfortable with the operating system. With Ubuntu it was a lot quicker to get better security features or updated versions. 

Initial setup is very straightforward. It takes maybe 10-15 minutes. I carried out the deployment myself. 

We haven't gone for a support subscription. Ubuntu is very reasonably priced for anyone looking to use it. 

I would recommend Ubuntu in preference to Red Hat which has shifted to a very advanced engineering team. Ubuntu is for anyone who wants to start out. It's best to use it on the desktop and server. It's one of the reasons providers like Google and Amazon are giving reviews based on Ubuntu.

I would rate this solution a nine out of 10.