Ubuntu Linux Reviews

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.

I am using this solution as an operating system.

Some of the main features of this solution are it is less prone to viruses since most viruses are written for Microsoft software, and it is easy to use.

They can keep improving the solution's ability to be adopted by users by adding features, such as better tutorials and integration into the system.

In a future release, from a user perspective, they should allow the integration of Microsoft Office or other business solutions. There are free tools available but I think these solutions would allow for better business adoption.

I have been using this solution for approximately three years.

The solution is stable.

I have found the solution to be scalable.

I have used Apple OS, Microsoft Window, and most recently started using Linux Mint.

The installation is easy and it takes approximately one hour. 

One of the benefits is you can have a dual boot of your system to allow both Ubuntu Linux and Microsoft Windows to be used.

I did the implementation of the solution myself.

This solution is free.

I would recommend this solution to others it is very stable.

I rate Ubuntu Linux an eight 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. 

We used this solution to do an integration between one of our PMS, property management systems. We integrated Opera and a cloud-based system. We use it as an interface between the Opera system, which is on a Windows server, and cloud bases system.

There should be more integration with other operating systems applications. It would be beneficial if there was a way to install Mac OS software on Linux. They could create a software patch to be able to have most of the unique Mac OS applications run on it, not Windows applications. They need to create something more user-friendly. 

Additionally, there is a lack of functionality compared to other operating systems.

I have been using the solution for two years.

The solution is stable and performing very well. When we an issue once and there was no need to restart it completely, you just needed to log in, see the log file, and fix the issue, it is very simple. It is more scalable than Windows systems. With Windows systems, most of the time you need to restart the whole computer, or the whole server, to fix the issue. With this solution, you do not.

The solution is very scalable.

The technical support has been very responsive. Additionally, they have forums and chats as alternatives.

I used Windows and Mac OS.

The installation was very fast.

I did the implementation of the solution myself.

There is not a license needed for the solution. You only have to pay for technical support.

I plan to keep using this solution in the future as long as it is still compatible with my PMS interface. 

I would not recommend this solution to others because there is not enough support available. Most of my colleagues in my company are using software that does not support this solution. The majority of professional software packages are not supported on Linux. They need to find a solution to this problem. 

I rate Ubuntu Linux a ten out of ten.

We primarily use the solution for web applications.

The solution is very flexible.

We've found the solution to be stable and the performance is reliable.

The solution has proven to be scalable. It can scale quite well.

The initial setup is pretty straightforward.

I have less experience with this solution than others, however, I can't recall specific improvements or features I would like to see.

It could always be a bit more secure. If they could continue to work on making it more and more secure in upcoming releases, that would be ideal.

I've been using the solution for about two years or so at this point. It's been a while.

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

The scalability potential of the solution is good. If a company would like to expand the solution, it can do so with relative ease. It's not hard. 

We have about 50 people in total who are currently using the solution.

Whether we continue to use the solution or increase usage will depend largely on end-user requirements. It's not really up to us for the most part.

The solution has been very easy to install. It's not overly complicated or difficult. it's pretty easy in general.

Normally, the deployment is pretty fast.

We have a technical team of two administrators that can handle any maintenance requirements.

I can handle the implementation myself. I do not need to call on consultants or integrators. It can be managed in-house.

We are not buying any licenses at the moment.

We are simply customers and end-users. We don't have a business relationship with Unbuntu Linux.

We are using the latest version of the solution. I cannot recall the version number off-hand.

I would rate the solution at a seven out of ten overall.

I would recommend the solution to other organizations and other users. We've had a good experience overall.

I'm responsible for building and providing container environments, and, therefore, I need to install and configure Kubernetes clusters on Linux operating systems. We use Ubuntu as a base operating system for the Kubernetes cluster and container environments.

It is easy to use, performs great, and is stable and scalable.

I think they need to focus more on securing and hardening Ubuntu's operating system.

The Linux operating system is very traditional, and you need to use specific commands. I think that it can be improved to be more handy.

All operating systems in the world are moving toward simplicity, and Linux distribution should also be focused on simplifying the GUI and command line to provide a better experience for the users.

I've been using Ubuntu and Linux systems for around three years.

I work with simple environments like a laboratory, and it is stable because there are no huge workloads on that server.

In general, I think Ubuntu servers are very stable for providing cloud native applications.

I think that Ubuntu Linux is a scalable solution.

We used Windows Server 2012 and 2016 before switching to Ubuntu Linux.

Installation is very simple and straightforward, but if you want to install more than one server simultaneously, for the Linux distribution, you would need to use an automation server. However, if the Linux community provides specific tools built into Linux like, for example, WDS Microsoft, then you will be able to simultaneously install multiple Linux operating systems on multiple servers.

In comparison to Red Hat, I think Ubuntu offers more security, scalability, and better performance, as well as better GUI and administration.

On a scale from one to ten, I would rate Ubuntu Linux at eight.