Ubuntu Linux Reviews

We primarily use Ubuntu to run and manage our monitoring solutions and applications. 

This solution is deployed on-premises. 

One of the most valuable features of Ubuntu Linux is how easy it is to manage. We have some monitoring solutions, so those applications are running on top of Ubuntu. So far, the applications are running in a way that's very stable, compared to other Linux versions and flavors. In terms of redundancy and the command line, it's very easy to manage. 

Ubuntu could be improved with more container integration and orchestration of those containers. We are looking to have more cloud-based solutions, like Docker, and container-based solutions, or Kubernetes-based solutions integrated with Ubuntu. Instead of going for VMs, we would like to have more container-based solutions on top of Ubuntu. 

We have been using Ubuntu for maybe four to five years. 

Ubuntu Linux is very stable, compared to other Linux versions. We are satisfied with the performance. 

We have five support engineers to maintain this solution. 

This solution is scalable. 

There are less than 20 end users of Ubuntu Linux in our organization. We don't have plans for expansion right now because we already have our requirements met, in terms of capacity. 

We haven't contacted technical support recently, but I think we did in the beginning. It was good. 

We switched to using Ubuntu Linux because it comes with a lot of new features. They are coming out with new releases and a lot of integrations. We have seen most of the applications work very well on top of Ubuntu, so we thought it was a good solution to go ahead with. 

The installation was very easy, not complex at all. We could manage it alone and we didn't have any issues. It took less than 30 minutes. 

We implemented this solution through an in-house team. 

I rate Ubuntu Linux a nine out of ten, and I would recommend it to others. 

We are primarily using the solution for programming. 

The solution is very easy to use.

We find the solution quite stable. 

The solution is cheap and open-source. It's not expensive at all.

The initial setup is simple.

We'd like to have a bit more of a friendly user interface. 

They seem to put out new releases too often and the solution changes too quickly.

I've been using the solution for more than ten years. 

The stability of the product has been good. There are no bugs or glitches. The performance is good. It doesn't crash or freeze on us. 

We have more than 100 users on this solution currently.

I've never contacted technical support. I just use the solution for personal tasks. I haven't had any issues that required me having to reach out to support for assistance. 

We found the initial setup to be very easy. We simply downloaded it from the internet.

I'm only part of a small department. Therefore, I'm not sure, company-wide, how many people are needed to perform maintenance, or if any maintenance is required. 

The solution is open-source. We don't have to pay in order to use it. I use it for personal use, and therefore it is free.

I'm a customer and an end-user.

We're using the latest version of the solution. With Ubuntu, you need to configure and install some packages.

I'd rate the solution at a nine out of ten. We've been quite happy with the solution's capabilities. 

Ubuntu is easy to use, and user-friendly. However, sometimes, it changes too quickly, and they release changes too quickly.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Stability is a broad topic. Ubuntu is stable. 

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.

There is a large community online.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

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

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

I have been using the solution for two years.

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

The solution is very scalable.

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

I used Windows and Mac OS.

The installation was very fast.

I did the implementation of the solution myself.

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

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

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

I rate Ubuntu Linux a ten out of ten.

The solution provides digital use for end users. I'm the director of the company and we are customers of Ubuntu. 

Ubuntu has better security and better production in comparison to Microsoft Windows and the hardware performance is better than Microsoft. The best feature of the solution is the auto upgrade operating system we get as a support from Ubuntu. The solution is good on the support level in several aspects; the web server, database management, security management, and viral management. Ubuntu is great on all of these.

The product currently lacks interoperability with other operating systems like Windows. This means that it's not possible to integrate with some of the popular Windows applications  such as accounting, tax, financial accounting and bracket improvement. I'd also like to see a lighter version of this solution. 

I've been using this solution for 15 years. 

This is a stable solution. 

This is a scalable solution. We are a 15-person team using the product but we have deployed for organizations which have 100+ users. We use a three or four person engineering team for deployment. We plan to increase usage of this product. 

We have hardly needed to contact technical support. The solution has good documentation and a community forum for support.

I've been using Red Hat and CentOS but I'm not comfortable with the operating system. With Ubuntu it was a lot quicker to get better security features or updated versions. 

Initial setup is very straightforward. It takes maybe 10-15 minutes. I carried out the deployment myself. 

We haven't gone for a support subscription. Ubuntu is very reasonably priced for anyone looking to use it. 

I would recommend Ubuntu in preference to Red Hat which has shifted to a very advanced engineering team. Ubuntu is for anyone who wants to start out. It's best to use it on the desktop and server. It's one of the reasons providers like Google and Amazon are giving reviews based on Ubuntu.

I would rate this solution a nine out of 10. 

We use Ubuntu Linux for software development to create a desktop environment for our developers, and we also have some VMs running Ubuntu-based services. 

Ubuntu is great because you get most of the packages or software you need. You get the latest updates and stuff fairly fast. 

We don't have any support, so we search for answers online. However, it can sometimes be a little messy to find the information if you have a highly specific question or a strange problem. It would be nice if finding information were a little simpler. Maybe they could have some portal that could point you to where you can find information. I think that's more of a general issue with open-source stuff. That's how it works.

We've been using Ubuntu for three or four years.

For desktop usage, we find Ubuntu is quite stable. We seldom have a problem with it even running on laptops. I think it's one of the better Linux distributions for running on laptops, and it supports various kinds of laptop hardware. 

We don't have any paid support. We use open-source knowledge bases or forums. We're used to that, so that works fine actually. We haven't tried any professional services for support because we manage the clients ourselves.

We use different Linux distributions depending on our needs. Ubuntu is good for our desktop workstations, but Red Hat is server based, and it's more stable over time, so we use that on the server for backend stuff. It depends on where it's going to run. We use Ubuntu for workstations and Red Hat or CentOS on the server side.

Ubuntu might have some room for improvement on the server side. But then again, we haven't used it much for that use case, so I don't know. It's easier for me to say what Red Hat or CentOS are missing on the desktop side. Nothing comes to mind that Ubuntu is missing in terms of desktop deployments. 

Setting up Ubuntu is fairly simple. It's just a workstation, so that's a relatively straightforward setup. 

We have special workstations with Ubuntu preloaded because it was the best for artificial intelligence within the hardware. We got the whole system, including the hardware, software, and setup. We have support with the total package, but that's the only thing we have to pay for, and we haven't needed to use that support. In general, we don't have any license costs for Linux systems. Some of the Red Hat systems have license costs, but most are open-source or free versions.

I would rate Ubuntu eight out of 10.

Ubuntu Linux is primarily used for applications. 

We use phpMyAdmin and an ISO Index, both of which run on Ubuntu Linux.

In Ubuntu, we use both the application and the storage. Those are the features we use frequently. We also use process management, which is how the process runs over the Ubuntu for the applications, which we review. If there is an issue with the processing, we will then troubleshoot and make it live.

The security features need improvement. They need more security features.

More security features are needed to protect the current file system to prevent attacks.

I have been working with Ubuntu Linux for seven years.

Ubuntu Linux is a stable solution. It is stable enough.

Ubuntu Linux is a scalable product.

We are working with medium-sized businesses. 

This solution is not used by everyone; only a few developers will use Ubuntu to deploy the code and make the application live.

I am satisfied with the technical support. I use technical support when I have issues, and they help with that.

The initial setup is very easy.

Ubuntu Linux is an open-source product. It's not expensive.

I would recommend this solution to anyone who is thinking about using it.

I would rate Ubuntu Linux an eight out of ten.

The solution is very lightweight and extremely powerful. You can do almost anything you want to do with these systems. You don't have any limitations. For example, for Windows, there's a limitation where you can't run microservices with Docker.

Docker only runs on Linux as it is actually using the Linux channel. If Microsoft can make the Linux Subsystem for Windows run Docker it would be good. Docker and microservices are the future of everything we are doing. Using Docker and microservices is the best - and it works well on Ubuntu.

For the moment, Ubuntu actually it's installing its own philosophy which according to me is so good.

The solution is always adding more features. 

The solution has great functionality and it's easier to use than Oracle or Windows.

Occasionally, we have problems with stability. They prefer functionalities over stability sometimes compared to Debian. For Debian, they prefer stability over functionalities - they don't make a run on new technologies. They stabilize, they implement the most stable versions that they can. 

Depending on the stability you require on your server, you might prefer going for Debian over Ubuntu. If it is implemented in servers where stability is not really a big deal then you go with Ubuntu as you likely need new features. 

We find that the stability isn't that great. They have opted to keep adding new features and functionalities, and due to the fact that it's always evolving, it's not as stable as a solution that is pretty static.

I use Debian as well. I prefer Debian, however, I also like Ubuntu. Ubuntu is like Debian. Ubuntu is from Debian. I'm also familiar with the Windows Server, and I find that Unbuntu is more flexible and has more potential in terms of how we need to use it. 

We currently use the open-source version of the product.

We do a lot of configurations for the community. We don't have a partnership with Canonical. We use the open-source solution.

I'd rate the solution at a nine out of ten. We've been very satisfied with the solution's capabilities. Compared to Windows, it's very good.