IT Central Station is now PeerSpot: Here's why

Ubuntu Linux OverviewUNIXBusinessApplication

Ubuntu Linux is #1 ranked solution in top OpenStack tools and #2 ranked solution in top Operating Systems for Business. PeerSpot users give Ubuntu Linux an average rating of 8 out of 10. Ubuntu Linux is most commonly compared to Oracle Linux: Ubuntu Linux vs Oracle Linux. Ubuntu Linux is popular among the large enterprise segment, accounting for 58% of users researching this solution on PeerSpot. The top industry researching this solution are professionals from a comms service provider, accounting for 34% of all views.
Ubuntu Linux Buyer's Guide

Download the Ubuntu Linux Buyer's Guide including reviews and more. Updated: June 2022

What is Ubuntu Linux?
Super-fast, easy to use and free, the Ubuntu operating system powers millions of desktops, netbooks and servers around the world.

Ubuntu Linux was previously known as Ubuntu.

Ubuntu Linux Customers
Samsung, eBay, AT&T, Walmart, Cisco, Time Warner Cable, Bloomberg, Best Buy, Dell, Intel, Microsoft, Ericsson, Orange, Wells Fargo

Ubuntu Linux Pricing Advice

What users are saying about Ubuntu Linux pricing:
  • "Ubuntu Linux is more affordable than its competitors."
  • "It is 100% free."
  • "Ubuntu is a free product."
  • "It is also manageable and financially affordable."
  • "It is open source, so it is free. There is no licensing fee."
  • "I am not in a position to comment on the licensing, as we mostly make use of the free version."
  • "We do not have any support agreements with Ubuntu, so we are using the free and open source version."
  • Ubuntu Linux Reviews

    Filter by:
    Filter Reviews
    Industry
    Loading...
    Filter Unavailable
    Company Size
    Loading...
    Filter Unavailable
    Job Level
    Loading...
    Filter Unavailable
    Rating
    Loading...
    Filter Unavailable
    Considered
    Loading...
    Filter Unavailable
    Order by:
    Loading...
    • Date
    • Highest Rating
    • Lowest Rating
    • Review Length
    Search:
    Showingreviews based on the current filters. Reset all filters
    Franco PaoloCarranza - PeerSpot reviewer
    Founder and CEO at Applied Labs
    Real User
    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.

    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.
    Buyer's Guide
    Ubuntu Linux
    June 2022
    Learn what your peers think about Ubuntu Linux. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: June 2022.
    610,229 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    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: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    Flag as inappropriate
    Technician / Network & Systems Administrator, ITAS Program at a university with 1,001-5,000 employees
    Real User
    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: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    Buyer's Guide
    Ubuntu Linux
    June 2022
    Learn what your peers think about Ubuntu Linux. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: June 2022.
    610,229 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Technical Presales Consultant/ Engineer at a wholesaler/distributor with 10,001+ employees
    Real User
    Top 5Leaderboard
    Open-source, user-friendly, stable, and has a good online community
    Pros and Cons
    • "The main distinguishing feature between Ubuntu and other Linux distribution is that Ubuntu has excelled at user-friendliness. It's very easy to use."
    • "One of the reasons people don't use Ubuntu on servers is because they are not as secure as Red Hat."

    What is our primary use case?

    I don't use Ubuntu very much, but I have been testing it for approximately ten years. 

    There are some that are running their data centers off of Ubuntu.

    Ubuntu Linux can be used for anything. Anything that you can do on Windows, you can do in Ubuntu. For example Microsoft Office, Microsoft is really famous for, their Windows platforms, and Office suite. 

    In the past, the open-source community had alternative software such as Open Office or even another project called Libre Office. These open-source solutions provided an office suite similar to Microsoft Office. However, with the new Office 365, you don't need Windows to work on Office these days. Outlook, PowerPoint, Excel are all web-based. You can run Ubuntu and open your Firefox browser and use it.

    What is most valuable?

    The best way and the easiest way to get into Linux is with Ubuntu because they provide lots of hardware support out of the box.

    You don't have to go into the deep parts with Ubuntu to install and configure it. There are many, ready-made guides online for Ubuntu, which is good. 

    The Linux distribution is the best for laptops. If you are using laptops, you don't want to be running Oracle Linux there or Red Hat. It's going to be Ubuntu.

    I like the easiness of Ubuntu. Ubuntu is a great product. It's awesome.

    Canonical as a company, who is responsible for Ubuntu, is doing a great job at making Ubuntu very easy, plug and play, and they are good at porting applications to Ubuntu. If you're talking about Linux, the easiest Linux distribution you can encounter is Ubuntu.

    The distribution with the most packages available to it is Ubuntu.

    In terms of user-friendliness, Ubuntu is the best it can get in the Linux world. To say that it could be improved would be unfair. They are the ones bridging the user-friendliness gap in the Linux world.

    The main distinguishing feature between Ubuntu and other Linux distribution is that Ubuntu has excelled at user-friendliness. It's very easy to use.

    What needs improvement?

    Ubuntu, as a distribution itself, is filled up with a lot of bloated software. That is the main reason why enterprise companies, mainly in the US, prefer to go with Red Hat, and SUSE is preferred mainly in Europe. 

    Red Hat and SUSE provide less bloat on their OS.

    Ubuntu is based on Debian, which is the first Linux distribution to ever come into existence, or the first mainstream Linux distribution. Debian also is bloated with a lot of software and sometimes some of the software is old. 

    I would love to see Ubuntu strip down. They have a server edition that is stripped down.

    Instead of having a billion different distributions, why can't there just be one? This would improve Linux and I would love to see this happen.

    One of the reasons people don't use Ubuntu on servers is because they are not as secure as Red Hat. They could be more secure, but for them to be more secure, you need to strip the bloatware. Bloatware is when you have several applications that are not needed and already installed in the operating system. They have a server edition and that comes stripped of the bloatware.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I have been working with Ubuntu Linux for more than ten years.

    I have used the latest edition of Ubuntu Linux. If I am not mistaken, the latest release is 20.04 LTS.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    Stability is a broad topic. Ubuntu is stable. 

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    Scalability? It Depends. It's Linux, you can do anything with it. 

    It depends on what you mean by scalability. You have to be very precise. If you're talking about data center and scalability, then, yes, it's scalable. 

    There are open-source projects that are being used, whether it be with Ubuntu or with Red Hat or with SUSE, to scale data centers, or to establish a scale-out architecture. It is possible to achieve scalability with Ubuntu, depending on the scenario. 

    With any other Linux distribution, you can achieve quite the same.

    How are customer service and technical support?

    There is a large community online.

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    I'm using something called Debian. Ubuntu is based on Debian Linux.

    I have used many operating systems. I have used Debian, CentOS, Fedora, Red Hat, and SUSE.

    I have also used distributions that have very weird names as well.

    How was the initial setup?

    Linux has always been a technology for technical people. Ubuntu bridges that gap. With Ubuntu, you don't need to know the technical parts of it very well to install it on a laptop and you can use Ubuntu without having any Linux knowledge.

    It is very straightforward and can be installed anywhere. That's the convenience of it. 

    For example, if tomorrow you face an issue and you Google it online, you will find many people who face the same issue and will provide workarounds or resolutions for the problem.

    It is very easy to install.

    The time it takes to deploy depends on the hardware you are installing it on, but normally it is 20 to 30 minutes to install onto a laptop or a server.

    What about the implementation team?

    You can install it yourself. It is similar to installing Windows. There is no difference. You burn the ISO image to the USB, boot the server or the laptop and follow the instructions. You click the "next" button until it is complete and you are good to go. You give it your password, the settings that you would like, and that's it.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    Ubuntu is a free product. 

    If I am not mistaken, you can purchase support contracts that are available from Ubuntu.

    You can always purchase Ubuntu, use it as often as you would like, and you can get enterprise support. 

    Canonical has its licensing scheme, but I think the product is free to use. 

    It has a GPL license, (General Public License). This license is always and will always be free to use. 

    I am not familiar with the prices because I never had to contact Canonical for support and inquired about how much it would cost for their support. 

    In general, you can always download their software and install it at any time for free and use it for free, according to the GPL license.

    What other advice do I have?

    I am mainly a free VM Linux advocate. I love open-source products in general. 

    At home, I have a server I'm running Linux on. I'm a Linux open-source enthusiast with more than 10 years of experience with multiple Linux distributions as a hobby. 

    In my line of business, I interact with Linux environments a lot and Unix space environments in general.

    I would recommend Ubuntu for anyone who's trying to learn Linux. 

    For anyone who is not technical but wants a free operating system on their computer, I would definitely recommend Ubuntu.

    I think there's something that needs to be clarified; Ubuntu shouldn't be compared to other distributions. These are just distributions. In the end, they share the same kernel. That is the thing with Linux. Linux is not a complete operating system. I will take the kernel, I will bundle it with a bunch of applications and then I will release it to the public and say that this is a distribution, which is not an operating system. 

    I would recommend that it be compared based on the kernel, not on distribution to distribution. Ubuntu was made for something. It was made to be user-friendly, it was made for laptops. It is doing a great job on that. 

    No other Linux distribution is doing as good of a job on that. For example, Red Hat or Oracle Linux, are not good on laptops, but they are good for servers. Red Hat is really good on enterprise servers.

    If you are going to run any data centers that are all based on Linux, it should be based on Red Hat or SUSE. If you are running any Oracle databases or Oracle applications, it would be better to run them on Oracle Linux, even though Oracle Linux and Red Hat share the same binaries. 

    There is no difference between the commands in Red Hat and Oracle Linux.

    Linux is a messed up world. Everybody has their own agenda, their own thing and it's basically the same. If you go to Ubuntu with Oracle Linux in the back end, it's the exact same. 

    This is the biggest nightmare with the Linux industry or the Linux world, that every day there is a new Linux distribution.

    It's great. I would rate Ubuntu Linux and eight out of 10. 

    It's a great product, very easy to install. It provides an alternative for Windows. 

    Some people don't want to pay Microsoft or can't afford Microsoft, they want to have their own operating system solo on their hardware. Ubuntu provides that and gives you the option to give you support for it.

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    Hybrid Cloud
    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    ImanDarabi - PeerSpot reviewer
    CTO at GreenWeb
    Real User
    Top 20
    Many good automation features
    Pros and Cons
    • "There are many good automation features in Ubuntu."
    • "Management monitoring and interface could be better."

    What is our primary use case?

    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.

    How has it helped my organization?

    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.

    What is most valuable?

    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.

    What needs improvement?

    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.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    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.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    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.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    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.

    How are customer service and technical support?

    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.

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    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.

    How was the initial setup?

    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.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

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

    Which other solutions did I evaluate?

    We previously evaluated Centos and OpenStack.

    What other advice do I have?

    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.

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    Private Cloud

    If public cloud, private cloud, or hybrid cloud, which cloud provider do you use?

    Other
    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    Buddy Parker - PeerSpot reviewer
    Founder at Element Flux
    Real User
    Top 5
    Provides flexibility and freedom to do whatever you need to do and is highly stable and resilient
    Pros and Cons
    • "There is a lot of freedom and flexibility to install it really quickly. It is just very powerful in the sense that it doesn't take up as many resources to run as some of the other operating systems. It is open source, so it is free. There is no licensing fee. There is flexibility and freedom to do whatever you need to do. If you are familiar with the command line, you can jump on the command line and configure almost any part of the operating system that you want. If you are not comfortable with the command line, the graphical user interface has really improved ever since I started using Linux back in high school. It is really very simple to manage your settings and other things. You can also try out multiple desktop environments. As a matter of fact, on one of my laptops, I have installed five different desktop environments, and I can switch between them. If you don't like one, you can easily just install another one with a few commands, and you have got a whole new desktop right there, whereas, in Microsoft Windows or a Mac, you are just stuck with whatever they give you, and you have to wait until they sell you something else."
    • "Like most Linux systems, they can just keep increasing support in Ubuntu for hardware systems. They can increase the number of drivers so that Ubuntu can work on more hardware. They have been improving greatly, but they can definitely keep doing that."

    What is our primary use case?

    I use it for everything. I literally use it for any activity that I would do on a computer. I use it for writing code, browsing the web, shopping, and streaming videos and music. I also use it for graphics editing and testing.

    How has it helped my organization?

    It has definitely improved the way I do things. There are so many people who are paying for products that they could use for free. In addition, there are bugs and issues that I hear about from other companies. With this solution, you can reduce the amount you spend in general on technology. Because Linux runs really well, your tech issues are also minimal, and you have to spend less on tech support. 

    What is most valuable?

    There is a lot of freedom and flexibility to install it really quickly. It is just very powerful in the sense that it doesn't take up as many resources to run as some of the other operating systems. It is open source, so it is free. There is no licensing fee. 

    There is flexibility and freedom to do whatever you need to do. If you are familiar with the command line, you can jump on the command line and configure almost any part of the operating system that you want. If you are not comfortable with the command line, the graphical user interface has really improved ever since I started using Linux back in high school. It is really very simple to manage your settings and other things.

    You can also try out multiple desktop environments. As a matter of fact, on one of my laptops, I have installed five different desktop environments, and I can switch between them. If you don't like one, you can easily just install another one with a few commands, and you have got a whole new desktop right there, whereas, in Microsoft Windows or a Mac, you are just stuck with whatever they give you, and you have to wait until they sell you something else.

    What needs improvement?

    Like most Linux systems, they can just keep increasing support in Ubuntu for hardware systems. They can increase the number of drivers so that Ubuntu can work on more hardware. They have been improving greatly, but they can definitely keep doing that.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I have been using this solution for at least four years. I use it every day.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    It seems to be really stable for me. The cool thing is that it is a journaled system versus Windows in which a lot of things are written into memory. They've improved on this quite a bit. If your computer crashes in the middle of updates or something like that, you can still easily access and go back to maybe what it was before you tried the update. Another thing that is really cool is that you can upgrade an entire distribution version. You can upgrade from version 18.04 to 20.04.

    A lot of web servers are probably running on some version of Linux, such as CentOS, and these web servers sometimes can go on for years without the need to be restarted. They are very resilient.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    I am not really sure of a use case for scaling in Ubuntu. It is just an operating system. It is not like adding a server or something like that.

    How are customer service and technical support?

    I haven't used technical support at all. I have always used stack overflow.

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    I was using Windows. I switched to Ubuntu because I was getting more into programming and I wanted something flexible.

    With Windows, everything is loaded into memory when the operating system is started. Linux is a journaled system, which means that you actually have all of that RAM available to process applications and run your applications rather than just running the operating system. There are various things that I like about Linux in that regard. If the computer crashes, I literally can recover the documents. I know that this is now happening in Windows systems, but I used to see that a lot more in Linux.

    How was the initial setup?

    The initial setup was very straightforward. If you have it set up on a bootable USB drive, you just put it in the USB drive and then you can just watch for a few steps. You don't even have to be very tech-savvy in order to install it and set it up. It doesn't take a lot of know-how.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    It is open source, so it is free. There is no licensing fee.

    What other advice do I have?

    I would recommend this solution if you want a good resilient system, flexibility, and control over your operating system. You can upgrade without having to pay or even turning off the computer. You don't need to shut it down and install upgrades. You can literally upgrade to a newer distribution while using the computer for the most part.

    I would rate Ubuntu Linux a nine out of ten because there is always room for growth. 

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    On-premises
    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    System Administrator at Figment Design Laboratories
    User
    Top 10
    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: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    Flag as inappropriate
    Senior architect at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees
    Real User
    A stable, secure and well performing solution, but needs a better repository of packages and more synthesized information
    Pros and Cons
    • "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."

    What is our primary use case?

    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. 

    What is most valuable?

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

    What needs improvement?

    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. 

    For how long have I used the solution?

    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. 

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

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

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    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. 

    How are customer service and technical support?

    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. 

    How was the initial setup?

    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. 

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

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

    What other advice do I have?

    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. 

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    Public Cloud

    If public cloud, private cloud, or hybrid cloud, which cloud provider do you use?

    Amazon Web Services (AWS)
    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    Principal Cloud Architect at a manufacturing company with 1,001-5,000 employees
    Real User
    Top 5
    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: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    Flag as inappropriate
    Buyer's Guide
    Download our free Ubuntu Linux Report and get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions.
    Updated: June 2022
    Buyer's Guide
    Download our free Ubuntu Linux Report and get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions.