Ubuntu Linux Reviews

It's very helpful for development. I'm a software developer. Linux is very easy to install a couple of things from the terminal. We can do most of the things from the terminal. It's very useful, in terms of their application in the cloud server. We can install it in the server, in our community server. If I do something in my local machine in the terminal, I can do the same thing in the cloud server. That's why I'm using Linux Ubuntu.

A few years ago, maybe two years ago, we were affected by some kind of encryption virus, a malware virus. It affected most of the Windows system due to the fact that our system was connected with some LAN connection. However, the Linux-based systems were not affected as it's a different OS. In our office, we just removed the Windows thing and put everything over on the Linux OS. 

It's stable.

The solution is free to use and open-source. There is no license needed, which is actually better, even though I like Windows. 

Our cloud server's a Linux-based operating system. I need to deploy my software on our cloud server. I just use Linux on my local server. Whatever I do for my software in my local server, the same needs to happen in the cloud server. That part is easy. I can replicate that software in my cloud server. If I do it in Microsoft Windows in that local development, that is totally different from our cloud server. It will cause issues in our cloud server. That's why I am using Linux in my system.

Linux is virus-free. 

The GUI in relation to the initial setup is very simple. 

If you are in the middle of an update, and things are disrupted, it can cause issues. You need to wait for the update to complete before doing anything. 

Windows we can handle by ourselves when it comes to troubleshooting, however, Ubuntu is a bit difficult. We need some other technical person to troubleshoot things for us. It's kind of difficult to maintain as compared to Windows.

In general, Windows is easier to use and friendlier to deal with than Ubuntu.

We've been using the solution for three years. 

The solution is stable and does not get infected with viruses. It's very resilient and the performance is good. I haven't dealt with bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze.

We have about 150 people using the tool.

We do plan to increase usage in the future.

Ubuntu has some community over the internet. There is an Ask Ubuntu community online. Whenever I have some problems, I can check through the website and get some solutions. Sometimes it can take a little longer to resolve things if the question doesn't have an answer online.

I'm also familiar with Windows. In many ways it is easier to use, however, it is more prone to viruses and malware, which can be an issue.

This is an open tool. It's easy to install. From the GUI, we can just click next, next, next, and then install.

The process is very simple. It's not overly difficult.

In terms of maintenance and troubleshooting, we do require a more technical person.

I can handle the initial setup myself. I do not need the assistance of any integrators or consultants. 

The solution is open-source. It doesn't cost anything to actually use it. You just download it from their website and you can start using it. 

Currently, I'm using Ubuntu 20 LTS, 20.04 long-term support.

I'd rate the solution at a seven out of ten. I tend to prefer Windows and would recommend it over Unbuntu.

We are using Ubuntu Linux for running applications.

The most valuable features of Ubuntu Linux are it is user-friendly, has plenty of features that you can develop and builds your own code. Additionally, it is secure and easy to operate.

The solution could improve by having better integration.

I have been using Ubuntu Linux for approximately five years.

The solution is bug-free and stable.

We have approximately 400 people using this solution in my organization.

The installation is easy and takes less than 20 minutes.

I can do the implementation myself. However, we have a five-person technical team of mostly engineers that do the implementation and maintenance of the solution.

The solution is open source and we do not need to pay for a license.

I would recommend this solution to others.

I rate Ubuntu Linux an eight out of ten.

I utilize the solution for running my personal applications.

Of value is that the solution is stable, easy to use, has features that are easy to connect to other Linux systems and can be managed and administered.

The solution should have more personal use applications for this platform. 

I have been using Ubuntu Linux for a couple of years.

The solution is stable. 

I do not have experience with technical support. 

Prior to going with the solution, I made use of Red Hat and Enterprise for business purposes. 

The solution is easy to install.

This took an hour. 

Installation can definitely be done on one's own. 

The solution does not come with a licensing fee. 

I am totally satisfied with the product.

I use it only for personal purposes and not in my organization. 

I would definitely recommend the solution to others. 

I rate Ubuntu Linux as a nine out of ten.

We use the solution for our Linux servers. 

We use it for file transfer and remote desktop connections.

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.

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.

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

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. 

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

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.

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.  

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.

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

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.

Ubuntu is mainly required for work services, your domain name services, and internet public-facing services.

It is flexible. It's the best of both worlds.

It's secure.

There is a lot of content available online that can help you, if you have an issue. There is good community support to help you with any issues you may encounter.

There are several manuals online that are free and available to help you.

The repository needs improvement. 

The repository needs to be kept up to date all of the time.

With my previous employment, I have used Ubuntu Linux for approximately five years. 

It is not currently being used but has been used within the last year. 

We were not using the latest version. It was between version 16.4 and 18.4.

It's a stable solution.

I use a mix of different solutions, two of which are Ubuntu Linux and CentOS.

The initial setup is straightforward and it is only ten minutes maximum to deploy.

We have one engineer to maintain this solution. It is not complex. It's something you install, configure, and walk away from.

We did not use a consultant, we completed the installation ourselves.

We don't pay any fees.

I would recommend this solution, and it works quite well.

I would rate Ubuntu Linux a nine out of ten.

We're using Ubuntu in a number of different ways and I even have a server for the main controller that's running Ubuntu so that people can authenticate and do various other things internally. I started using Linux a very long time ago and it wasn't Ubuntu. Ubuntu just happened to be the friendliest, nicest solution out there. It is also the easiest to sell to other people. 

One of the things I like about this solution is that you can leave it without having to boot into a rescue mode at one of your servers. You don't have to change permissions or go through nightmarish scenarios to solve technical issues. 

The most valuable features of this solution are standardization, visualization, and package management. I also like their videos. 

Ubuntu is following mainline Linux, and what Ubuntu really does well is packaging it well so that you've got a really turnkey desktop or service solution. Their stuff is pretty good as far as it goes. I've enjoyed using the product because of those things. 

I would love to see more, open documentation and a bigger ecosystem. I think Ubuntu's main strength, as opposed to using the other Linuxes, has been its ability to encourage user feedback. I think that's something that can always be improved. So it's just about keeping that open and increasing the certainty in IT because IT needs to know what we're going to stick with. When you decide to make an architectural change, it may be better to get community feedback first, and maybe then announce it in a different way. I don't think it's very technical and the community feedback route should be looked at or be improved. 
They might also add additional features, like something to tweak the home desktop a little bit for new users. 

The solution is very stable and the long term support releases have been great. It is always a very good idea to read what's happening and not to switch over too quick. We have products that we put out that we build, so we also have to make sure that all the libraries around that product are going to be working the same before we even start to use it. So the stability is fantastic. We've been very happy about the long term support release and we've hardly had any problems at all.

Ubuntu Linux is built to scale well. We are currently running our entire infrastructure on it. So we've got virtual machine servers, word servers, and version control for code. And I've got an office with at least ten people using the desktop version.

I'm hoping that our software service will grow and then we will have much more server usage. We are part of a much bigger corporation with more than 20,000 employees in the active directory. So, we used to previously push Ubuntu much harder, but these days we just like to let people choose whether they want to use it. And we buy Ubuntu certified laptops for the people who want to use Ubuntu for enterprise. Linux is still a bit of a second class citizen on enterprise desktop, because of active directory dominance.

Up to now we solved our own technical issues, like normal de-bugging. Other issues I like to solve by using different technologies. But not without having to go through a very diverse ecosystem where there's a lot of solutions in place.

I used Linux a few years back and then I moved from Linux onto Ubuntu in 2006. I liked the way Ubuntu community marketed itself. I like to use friendly solutions, and not solutions where elitist techno people make other people feel inferior.

My advice to others would be to know what you really want. Ubuntu can be customized to exactly those functions. Depending on how you want to scale, for example, you might want to look at microservers, architecture, and how to connect it all up. And have your Ubuntu servers as small nodes or even containers. The solution offers many options, so if you're starting with Linux or Ubuntu, I would start with playing around in virtual machine space, seeing how the package management works, write some scripts, getting to know a little Bash. The solution is very secure and there is a lot of documentation available already. 

I rate this solution an eight out of ten.

• Surprised with the better use of resources for old machines.
• The GUI is easy and friendly.
• The environment was a test machine with Intel i586 (recommended).

Improved on the recycling of old computers, but most users ask for a solution for new equipment. 

Use of the tools for systems and software to test functionalities. The integration with other applications, like Chrome or Firefox, works excellent for users navigating and test browsing.

Developing more applications for businesses could work better, but that is not part of the OS piece. Let the developers work on other apps, therefore the needs for consuming less memory do not affect the performance of this OS version.

Old equipment works for at least two or three years more, which means a significant savings.

I use this product on my desktop, it's a basic system for developing applications. Our company is based in the Czech Republic. I'm a systems architect and customer of Ubuntu. 

There is value in the long-time supported LPS distribution and there is an updated version that has recently become available. 

I'd like to see some improvement with the installer in terms of the encryption of the partition regarding software systems. I also had an issue with the swap file when I implemented and that took some time to deploy. 

I've been using this solution for 10 years. 

The solution is stable. 

The initial setup is straightforward and doesn't take much time. I had one issue with the encryption of the application and that took additional time. We have around eight users in the company and we carried out the integration ourselves. 

I'm using the non-supported version which is free. 

I highly recommend this product and rate it 10 out of 10.