We just raised a $30M Series A: Read our story

Schedule a 30-minute demo or reference call with a real user from the PeerSpot community. Available only to members that are in a buying process for this product and have contributed a review that's then published.

Ubuntu Linux OverviewUNIXBusinessApplication

Ubuntu Linux is #1 ranked solution in top OpenStack tools and #4 ranked solution in top Operating Systems for Business. IT Central Station 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. The top industry researching this solution are professionals from a comms service provider, accounting for 37% of all views.
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 Buyer's Guide

Download the Ubuntu Linux Buyer's Guide including reviews and more. Updated: November 2021

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

Pricing Advice

What users are saying about Ubuntu Linux pricing:
  • "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."

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
DG
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.
Flag as inappropriate
MA
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.
Flag as inappropriate
Learn what your peers think about Ubuntu Linux. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: November 2021.
555,139 professionals have used our research since 2012.
ImanDarabi
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.
Flag as inappropriate
Buddy Parker
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.
OP
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.
Flag as inappropriate
MS
Head of Technical Support at a real estate/law firm with 51-200 employees
Real User
Top 5Leaderboard
Easy to set up, simple to use, and doesn't drain battery power on laptops

Pros and Cons

  • "It's faster than Windows."
  • "When you talk of some of the flexibility, like you want to install from scratch, Windows is more user-friendly compared to Linux."

What is our primary use case?

We use the solution for our Linux servers. 

We use it for file transfer and remote desktop connections.

What is most valuable?

The solution is very simple.

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

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

The solution is straightforward to set up.

It's faster than Windows.

What needs improvement?

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

For how long have I used the solution?

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

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

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

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

How are customer service and technical support?

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

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

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

How was the initial setup?

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

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

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

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

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

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

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

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

What other advice do I have?

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

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

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

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

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
KS
Computer Manager at a university with 10,001+ employees
Real User
Top 5Leaderboard
Easy to scale and update with good scalability

Pros and Cons

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

What is our primary use case?

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

What is most valuable?

The solution is easy to install and easy to update.

You can scale the solution quite well.

What needs improvement?

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

For how long have I used the solution?

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

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

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

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

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

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

How are customer service and technical support?

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

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

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

How was the initial setup?

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

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

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

What other advice do I have?

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

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

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

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

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

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
Mukesh Regmi
Co-Founder- Operation & Digital technology transformation at Cloudtreez
Real User
Top 5
Good interface and pretty stable but the initial setup can be difficult

Pros and Cons

  • "They have provided a new interface, which is great."
  • "You need a lot of bandwidth during the initial setup in order to pull from the repository. Without good bandwidth, you'll get cut off and the implementation will fail."

What is our primary use case?

I primarily use it in my day to day work to test my products. There are a lot of open-source tools on the market, and I need this product to have something to deploy them on.

What is most valuable?

I prefer the new organization of Ubuntu. The repository is excellent.

They have provided a new interface, which is great. 

I don't need the UI so much as the CLI, however, both are excellent.

What needs improvement?

While for the most part, I am quite happy with the new developments on the solution, from my perspective (and as a user or a solutions architect), the product needs to keep on doing enhancements according to the needs sprouting out of recent developments in technology.

There should be a CI/CD process for all software that it is on the market.

Overall, the solution offers me exactly what I need. I'm not really missing any features.

You need a lot of bandwidth during the initial setup in order to pull from the repository. Without good bandwidth, you'll get cut off and the implementation will fail.

For how long have I used the solution?

I've been using the solution for about four or five years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The stability is good. Whatever I've needed to maintain, I've been able to on Unbuntu. It doesn't crash or freeze and it's not buggy. I find it to be reliable.

That said, they do have to look at their security measures and maybe tighten those up a bit.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

I'm not sure about the scalability of the solution. It may be how you use the solution and how you set it up.

We're just a startup with a small team of maybe ten people. We aren't a big organization.

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

I'm familiar with many different options, including CentOS, Red Hat, and SUSE. I prefer Unbuntu out of all of these. However, it is a personal preference. Each has its own pros and cons.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup is not very complex although I wouldn't exactly describe it as straightforward. You need to have the right people on it. Those that understand the industry will have an easier time. Otherwise, it might not connect to the correct server and will get disconnected, causing the implementation import to fail. 

Countries that lack bandwidth need Unbuntu to offer a CAP server so they can pull off the repository and do updates and upgrades that won't fail if the bandwidth cuts.

Therefore, it's not necessarily the installation itself that gives you trouble. Unbuntu needs to get closer to the countries in order to make it easier to pull from the repository easily.

What other advice do I have?

I highly recommend the solution. It's very popular among developers. It's worked quite well for us.

Of course, solutions like Red Hat and CentOS also have good capabilities. For us, however, Unbuntu is the best.

Overall, I'd rate the solution seven out of ten. It offers me basically everything I need and has worked well for our team.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.