The use case for Ubuntu is not the information system production environment for the operating system. It is used to run applications.
We are not utilizing Ubuntu in critical applications.
The use case for Ubuntu is not the information system production environment for the operating system. It is used to run applications.
We are not utilizing Ubuntu in critical applications.
Ubuntu Linux is developer-oriented.
Similar to Windows 10, I would like the ability to manage it on Azure or integrate it with Azure.
We have been using Ubuntu Linux for 10 years.
Ubuntu Linux is a stable solution.
It's a scalable product, but not the best. We have 2,000 systems.
We have not contacted technical support.
With an expert, the installation was easy. We had no issues with the installation.
We completed the installation ourselves.
Ubuntu Linux is free, but you can pay for a supported version that is better.
I would recommend Ubuntu for development and to run applications that are non-information system critical.
I would rate Ubuntu Linux a ten out of ten.
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 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.
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.
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 testing virtual servers and kernel-based programming.
The most valuable features are the pseudo-terminal and it is the most open-sourced operating system that can be used.
There is not a lot of support for applications in Ubuntu Linux. In the industry, most of the applications work for Windows and Mac. There should be better integration with applications in the future.
I have been using this solution for approximately two years.
The solution is stable.
I have found the solution is highly scalable. We can use any virtual hardware that we can think of, there are no boundaries with scalability.
We have five engineers that use this solution in my organization and we plan to increase usage.
I have previously used Microsoft Windows 10 and I am still using this solution for personal use.
We have five engineers that do the implementation and maintenance of the solution.
This is a free solution.
I would recommend this solution to others.
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.