Ubuntu Linux Reviews

Ubuntu is a Linux operating system and one of the applications that it hosts is my SQL database.

Ubuntu Linux is very useful as an operating system.

It has got longer support than some Linux distributions for each version that comes out, so it's good for enterprise-level organizations.

Ubuntu is very easy to use and you can manage it on your own. Compared to other Linux distributions, it is more user-friendly.

If the user interface were further improved then it would be better because more people would be able to use it.

I have been using Ubuntu Linux for approximately five years.

Ubuntu provides quite a stable environment.

Ubuntu is scalable and we have approximately 10 users in our organization. It is very easy to scale up and there are no licenses involved. It is just a matter of upgrading your own hardware.

We have not had any technical support issues.

We have multiple versions of Linux distributions. The suitability for each, or which one we use, depends on the demand from the vendors and developers.

It is very easy to install, and it will take approximately 30 minutes to complete.

I have done some installations myself, although most of the setup was completed by our system administrator.

It comes as free software, where there is an option for you to buy support licenses.

Overall, I think that Ubuntu Linux is quite good. It is meeting our expectations and I recommend it.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

There are many features I like about this solution, but one that stands out is that it allows me to easily install new packages and to have recent packages available. 

I am really very satisfied with this solution. However, one thing that I would like to see improve, is to have better support for multiple screens with multiple resolutions. For me, that is the most important feature.

Ubuntu Linus has always been very stable for us.

This solution is very scalable on the server with some add-ons like like containers, Docker containers and kubernetes. We are a relatively small development company with only three staff members. But I've installed this for customers with hundreds of users supported by the Ubuntu server. 

I've never had to use their technical support, so that just shows how good the product is. 

I used Debian before, but newer versions and solutions are out there and we've decided to start using Ubuntu Linux instead. 

When I first installed it, it was fairly easy. But when I installed it onto my new laptop, it was rather complex because it involved adding all the drivers. 

I use the free version, so I don't have any license fees.

I will give this solution a ten out of ten.

We are planning to use the solution for hosting, but we haven't yet started anything. It is still in the testing phase.

Ubuntu Linux is an easy-to-use solution.

The solution could improve its GUI personalization. The solution's in-built version does not have many applications like File Explorer. Ubuntu Linux is more suitable for new beginners. It would be good if applications could be pre-built into the solution.

I have been using Ubuntu Linux for two to three months.

The solution’s initial setup is easy.

I use Ubuntu Linux free of cost.

Before choosing Ubuntu Linux, I evaluated SUSE. I chose Ubuntu Linux because it has a low maintenance cost.

Overall, I rate Ubuntu Linux an eight out of ten.

We use the solution as a desktop appliance.

I like that the solution is stable and easy to manage.

As I use Debian with KDE and love it more than Ubuntu, I choose to rate Ubuntu Linux as a nine out of ten, whereas I rank Debian as a ten. This is because I feel Debian have a more stable operating system than Ubuntu Linux. This is my sole reason for this rating. 

I have been using Ubuntu Linux for five years. 

The solution is stable, although I feel Debian, which I use with KDE, to have a more stable operating system than Ubuntu Linux. 

While the scalability can vary, I do feel the solution to be scalable. 

Canonical does not provide us with technical support for the solution. 

I make use of Debian with KDE and feel Debian's operating system to offer more stability than Ubuntu Linux. 

First time installation is very user friendly. It is very easy, even more so than Windows. 

We make use of the solution for our in-house use.

I feel the graphical interface to be very user friendly, as is first time installation. 

I also work in the private sector and have my own company for implementing surveys for reviews and clients. My first suggestion would be to go with open source. We use Proxima and also use uni version in the domain control of it. We use Ubuntu Linux on the client side. So, I strongly recommend using open source and not spending too much money on the licensing with Microsoft.

As all of the applications are usually now on the database, what else does one need? A single operating system consisting of scalability and speed means the person will not have to deal with all the dump stuff that happens behind. Of primary importance is to have a good internet connection and Chrome. For these small jobs, I see no need for use of Windows or Mac. Apple or Microsoft should be used for designing other things. I am referring to Ubuntu and Linux use. 

I rate Ubuntu Linux as a nine out of ten.

There are no specific uses beyond it being an operating system.

I like the flexibility.

I work on the command line.

If you update certain models, it's not as easy at times.

My main issue with Ubuntu Linux is that there are too many ways to administrate Linux.

The config file can be changed in many ways, but with other solutions, there is only one way to configure the system.

In Linux, there are too many ways to configure it. My colleague configures in one way and I configure in another way, which makes it confusing.

They should unify the way to configure the Linux systems. 

You can change the ATC conflict file. You can change some distributions in another way. 

You have to look on many sites if you like to know why and why the configuration is set for in that way.

I have been using Ubuntu Linux for two years.

We have used version 16 for a long time, version 18, and version 20 for quite some time.

I have no issues with the stability of this solution.

Ubuntu Linux is scalable.

We have approximately 100 users in our organization.

Ubuntu Linux is the popular choice in our company. It is approved to continue usage.

I have never used technical support.

I only use research on the internet.

I am also using IX, HP Unix, Ubuntu, and some Linux.

It is very easy to install.

I completed the installation myself. I did not use an integrator or consultant.

I am a project manager. I am not a system administrator, I don't know about the cost.

I would recommend this solution to others who are interested in using it.

I would rate Ubuntu Linux an eight out of ten.

It's a free and open source software-defined storage (SDS) that runs on various platforms such as Ubuntu, CentOS, RHEL, IBM Z, among others.

It can be used for a bulk object including as an alternative to OpenStack Swift, Swiftstack, and others. Can also be configured for the block as well as the file.

Hmmmm…….Good question.

Ease of use, ease of management, ease of deployment, ease of troubleshooting, resiliency, automation, and performance.

I have used various versions of Ceph off and on at different times, going back several years.

Yes, on the other hand, deploy in a controlled environment, stay within the “box”, and it works well.

For my use, I did not scale it very large, as was concerned with doing so and with not having enough hardware to maintain performance.

In other words, depending on what you are looking to do, while being SDS, Ceph is also hardware dependent, as is all SDS.

However, it also needs CPU, memory and fast storage for OSDs as you scale activity.

N/A, relied on various forums and Ceph site (looked at Red Hat site info, however, found ceph and other sites more useful).

I have used and do use various others, including services such as AWS S3 /EBS /EFS /EC2 instance, as well as Azure Files/Blobs/etc, GCS.

Also on-prem software, including Microsoft S2D, VMware vSAN, OpenStack/Swift among others.

Depends on your experience, and what you are trying to do, there are some useful scripts floating around, or you can get a turnkey kit solution from vendors such as Fujitsu, SUSE, Red Hat, and many others.

Look beyond the initial cost, for example, free if open source version, or price for a kit from Fujitsu, SUSE, RHEL among others.

Look at ongoing costs for maintenance. This is particularly important if you are going the free route as you will end up paying regarding allocating or using more of your staffs time to support, maintain, upgrade and enhance.

VMware vSAN (still have), Microsoft Windows Storage Spaces Direct/S2D (still have), Dell EMC ECS/Atmos (still have), OpenStack Swift (still have), AWS S3 (still have), Azure (still have), Datacore (did a trial), and many others.

Some others to look at and consider include Dell EMC ScaleIO, Elastifile, Hedvig, HDS HCP, NetApp StorageGrid, Nexenta, Noobaa, Rozo, Starwind, Storpool, Virtuozzo, and WekaIO, among others.

Do a proof of concept (POC), scaling as large as you can as close to your intended production environment.

If needed, use Google, AWS, Azure or some other cloud to do the POC in.

Look for several things in your POC including what are the hardware performance and resource (CPU, memory, I/O, SSD) dependencies, how easy to manage, tune, troubleshoot along with resiliency.

For example, fail nodes and see how system recovers as well as what you need to do to support the environment. Don’t be scared of Ceph, be prepared and informed, use it where it makes sense and is capable of meeting your needs. Make sure that you can get ceph to work for you, vs. you having to go to work for ceph.

We primarily use it for our personal applications. We use it in our day-to-day work. 

It's easy to deploy.  We can deploy it whenever we want. 

It's great to use with the Linux system. They work well together. 

If you know what you want to program, they make it very easy to do so. 

The solution is very stable. It's great for security and it is very safe.

The installation process is simple.

We don't have enough information about this system. When we run into problems, we'd like for it to be more clear what a valid solution might be. For example, if I try to deploy a certain technology, I have to look all over the internet to figure out how to accomplish this. There aren't enough experts in my country to be able to help troubleshoot or to post answers to problems. I'm not sure if there are enough domestic or regional experts who know enough about the solution.

The interface could be better.

I have used this solution for quite a long time. It's been more than five years.

The solution is quite stable. Its performance is good. There are no bugs or glitches. it doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable. 

I'm not sure if the product is scalable. I haven't attempted to scale it and therefore could not accurately comment on that aspect.

We have the solution in different departments and on different servers. In our department, maybe five or six people use it. 

We don't get technical support from people. If we need an answer to a problem, we need to seek it out online. 

I have found that the solution is

That said, it depends on the type of server that you are using. You need to ensure it has enough resources. The deployment is quick and we were able to do it in 30 minutes or so.  

While we have a technical team of about 15 people in our department that can handle deployment and maintenance tasks, there are other departments and other people on different teams that can as well.

I'm quite comfortable with the solution. I can handle the implementation process myself. I did not need the help of any integrators or consultants. 

The solution is free to use and free to explore. People can go ahead and discover it and experiment with it. 

I would recommend the product to other users and other companies. It's a good solution in general. 

I'd rate the solution at a seven out of ten.

What makes Ubuntu easy to use is the large set of applications and the interface. The graphical interface is user friendly.

When installing software, an online interface has to be used and commands written to run the installation. The solution could be improved if it was possible to click twice in an icon for the installation process to begin. 

In the next release, I would like to be able to use Microsoft Office within Linux. 

.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.