The solution must provide more integrations.

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

The product must provide integrated security solutions. I use third-party security solutions now.

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.

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."

The user interface must be more user-friendly for non-technicians.

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.

Ubuntu Linux is good for one to two years. We can easily identify the line numbers and everything we could be able to see. Additionally, we have stable and standard paths for root directories, so we can easily remember those folder setups.

Sometimes certain tasks are challenging due to issues with the command-line interface. Users who prefer Windows may find it difficult to transition to Linux. So, I believe Linux could enhance its user interface to make it more user-friendly for a wider range of users.

Therefore, I suggest improving the user interface.

In additional features, I would like to add an additional software store alongside the existing one. Similar to the Microsoft Store, it offers a wide range of software options.

The product must enable automation using AI. It will be helpful for everyone. The product must provide flexibility for upgrading big data environments.

Ubuntu Linux requires no improvement or changes since it has been working in excellent condition for the past twenty years.

There are certain shortcomings related to the product's frequency of updates. From an improvement perspective, my company expects the solution to offer less frequent updates.

The support can be improved. 

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.

Official support is low. We’re mostly dependent on community users. The vendor must provide an official support team. Administration is a challenge. We need good skills for implementation.

The product could be compatible with Microsoft.

The solution's initial setup is complex, and its technical support is not very good.

The product is difficult to use sometimes. We need to learn the commands before using the solution. It must be made easier to use.

Windows can automatically detect the drivers of new devices, and you can easily use them in the Windows system. Ubuntu Linux does not easily detect the drivers of new devices, and you need to do some trial and error for some of the third parties porting into it.

Ubuntu Linux should improve its embedded hardware so that users can work easily. In order to use multiple embedded devices with Ubuntu Linux, I need to add some device drivers.

Ubuntu Linux needs to improve its stability. I would like it to show the battery percentage at the screen top. 

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

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

Stability could be improved.

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

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

The product should provide more automation. If automation is available, we wouldn’t have to do manual configurations and setups.

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'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.

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.

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.

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. 

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.

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

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

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. 

Ubuntu Linux is not easy to use because its interface is quite tricky. People with a Windows background may not find the solution's user interface user-friendly.

The support team is not good and needs to be improved. The user community is excellent and helpful, but some questions are unanswered. Also, stability and scalability could be improved.

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.

The solution is a little complicated to customize and could be made easier.

In a future release, the implementation of lightweight desktops and remote access for server platforms could be improved.

While there are not many features which need to be added, we sometimes are forced to resort to Google Drive sync or OneDrive sync, owing to the lack of availability of certain Microsoft solutions. The team is disparately comprised nowadays, some of whom may be using Microsoft. This would, in turn, require one to use Microsoft himself and there is some compatibility which is simply lacking. Generally speaking, it's okay. Nowadays, everything is moving to the cloud, making browser-based usage easy. 

It would be nice to see more compatibility with certain Microsoft solutions, such as OneDrive. One would want to sync OneDrive, in which case, when the client makes the data available there, we would have easy access to it. These kind of syncing features are not fast. 

The solution is not user-friendly in comparison with Windows. It should be more so. 

We used the technical support of Microsoft Windows, as Ubuntu does not offer any support of its own. It would be nice to see local support. 

A problem we have encountered when installing the package is that certain packages are not available, which requires downloading of them on our part. As such, the solution should have a better repository of packages. Otherwise, one must download them from a third party slide. However, as I am not involved in the monitoring aspects, DevOps or Linux, I am probably not the best person to comment on this. 

From an end-user perspective it would also be nice to see better support and guidance when concerning the installation process, better training facilities when it comes to the solution's use. 

There is also a need to rely on third party websites for information which concerns the setup and it would be good if it were synthesized in such a way that the user could comfortably learn it autonomously. 

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

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

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

There is room for improvement, particularly in the GUI aspect of the product. We encounter issues while accessing GUI compared to Red Hat or CentOS. The simulation tools could be easy to use and facilitate efficient integration with remediation tools similar to Duo on CentOs.

For the beginner who might not be very comfortable with the tool, it can be frustrating. Like with any new solution, it's complex in the beginning. The solution has limited application support compared with Windows and MacOS. It's not an issue with the system itself, it's the choice of the company that makes the software. It's a marketing decision made by the manufacturer. Most games I run are designed to be run for Microsoft Windows. It doesn't run many softwares that we have online. You don't have many games on Linux, but Linux is not the problem, it's a choice the developer has made. 

It could be easier for beginners and the user interface could be more user-friendly.

But it could be better for working with software at a high resolution. 

The solution could improve by being more user-friendly.

I can't really speak to any missing features.

There are some costs on offer that could be lower.

The learning curve is quite high for non-technical users. Therefore, it's not a suitable solution for a general office environment.

On the gaming side, things are happening but there are some games that should be ported to Ubuntu. Gamers generally don't adopt Linux, and the choice is normally Windows.

The only improvement I would suggest is to switching back to Aptitude. They switched a lot of the packages that used to be running in Aptitude to Snap. I don't find them as usable when they are in Snap. The most obvious instance of this is that it's caused me to have issues with Chrome. Starting Chrome took a couple of seconds before it was up and running, which wasn't pleasant. Back when it used to run packaging in Aptitude, I didn't have this problem. I know they're familiar with these issues because a lot of other people have experienced them too. 

The product could be better. It lacks the ability for disk expansion and is not very suitable for our needs. I also think support could be improved thereby simplifying installation. 

I don't like the graphical interface in Ubuntu and it should be better.

As a product, I can't think of anything much because we are yet to fully utilize the product and it has met all our expectations. The technical training is the one that needs to be updated regularly and also engagement of more technical training partners.

Stability is a big issue in my opinion. I have found version 12 to be more stable. I have tried various desktop environments and MATE seemed most stable to me.

The solution's stability could be improved.

Similar to Windows 10, I would like the ability to manage it on Azure or integrate it with Azure.

You have to do a lot of configurations yourself. It is not very user friendly, but if you wanted to be a technical person, you may use it. However, you may still have a lot of difficulty with the configuration.

They could make more automations for the average user.

There is not a lot of support for applications in Ubuntu Linux. In the industry, most of the applications work for Windows and Mac. There should be better integration with applications in the future.

If the user interface were further improved then it would be better because more people would be able to use it.

I am really very satisfied with this solution. However, one thing that I would like to see improve, is to have better support for multiple screens with multiple resolutions. For me, that is the most important feature.

The solution could improve its GUI personalization. The solution's in-built version does not have many applications like File Explorer. Ubuntu Linux is more suitable for new beginners. It would be good if applications could be pre-built into the solution.

As I use Debian with KDE and love it more than Ubuntu, I choose to rate Ubuntu Linux as a nine out of ten, whereas I rank Debian as a ten. This is because I feel Debian have a more stable operating system than Ubuntu Linux. This is my sole reason for this rating. 

If you update certain models, it's not as easy at times.

My main issue with Ubuntu Linux is that there are too many ways to administrate Linux.

The config file can be changed in many ways, but with other solutions, there is only one way to configure the system.

In Linux, there are too many ways to configure it. My colleague configures in one way and I configure in another way, which makes it confusing.

They should unify the way to configure the Linux systems. 

You can change the ATC conflict file. You can change some distributions in another way. 

You have to look on many sites if you like to know why and why the configuration is set for in that way.

Ease of use, ease of management, ease of deployment, ease of troubleshooting, resiliency, automation, and performance.

We don't have enough information about this system. When we run into problems, we'd like for it to be more clear what a valid solution might be. For example, if I try to deploy a certain technology, I have to look all over the internet to figure out how to accomplish this. There aren't enough experts in my country to be able to help troubleshoot or to post answers to problems. I'm not sure if there are enough domestic or regional experts who know enough about the solution.

The interface could be better.

When installing software, an online interface has to be used and commands written to run the installation. The solution could be improved if it was possible to click twice in an icon for the installation process to begin. 

In the next release, I would like to be able to use Microsoft Office within Linux. 

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.

The solution could improve by having better integration.

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

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.

The repository needs improvement. 

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

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. 

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.

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. 

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.

It is an open-source tool, and it doesn't have any support. If there is an issue with the implementation of a feature, such as clustering, I am not sure how to resolve it and get support for it.

The stability of the vendor packages also impacts the stability of this solution. When vendor packages are unstable, or any packages are broken, they also impact Ubuntu Linux. It is very hard to resolve an issue related to unstable vendor packages.

The Linux for desktop marketing could be improved but that is not only for Canonical/Ubuntu an issue.

How could these areas be improved? All parties (commercial, idealogical and non-commercial (I.e. the rest)) together could be a force to rekon with. But I do not think that there is a way to let them join forces. So, it is down to smaller initiatives to make people aware of the alternatives to Windows. Also, the required buying of Windows on each PC does not help. I think this is not helpful for IT as a whole.

The system is already user-friendly, but what could be improved is its ease of deployment. Its ease of use could also be improved.

I find the solution could be easier to use, more flexible, user-friendly, and have a better UI.

In the future, I would like to see easier deployment.

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.

We don't have any kind of support. We have our own skills here at the university and it's enough.

The ZFS needs improvement. They do an implementation of the ZFS storage that needs improvement. 

The rpm-based distributions (such as Suse, Red Hat, CentOS, Fedora) ship with support for awesome system management software (Spacewalk, just to name one example). Ubuntu often provides *some* support for these tools, but it is very rarely supported a 100%. Canonical has Landscape and some other stuff; however, this is not sufficient. Canonical clearly should provide more system management tools which integrate into enterprise environments. Red Hat, CentOS and Suse clearly have more advantages here.

Furthermore, the Unity desktop and the advertisment integration of third parties are horrible.

Ubuntu Linux could improve by having more out-of-the-box functionality for common plug-and-play devices, such as printers. It's sometimes more difficult to plug-and-play printers with Ubuntu Linux. You need to work a bit and make some drivers work. They need to work a bit on plug-and-play devices.

Up until now, I don't have any issues with Ubuntu, but one thing that could be improved is that there are no repair options for the existing Ubuntu installation. You can do a new installation, which is what I've seen, but you can't repair the broken existing installation, or recover from an OS that's broken down.

The solution could improve by allowing more integration. 

The solution has many security features already but they could still improve.

Compare it to Amazon AWS and you will see how much they can grow. Every company wants to grow as much as possible, or even more than AWS. So compare Digital Ocean with AWS and you will see how much they can grow. I don´t mind using AWS anymore and I think that what Digital Ocean offers me is enough.

They can improve the interface and give it an appearance similar to the Windows 11 operating system.

I don't have many technical insights about the product. I can't speak to what features are missing. 

For user interfaces, there are other operating systems such as Windows and Mac that are more user-friendly. Linux does not provide a user-friendly interface.

The solution could improve by being more secure.

They can make it user-friendly. It is not totally user-friendly.

The interface could be more user-friendly.

Recently, we experienced a problem with the integration with DAD where it was not syncing.

At times, it can be complex when we are trying to integrate or when we are trying to set up some features.

This product is not suitable for data transportation, data backups, or other data applications.

More drivers for hardware such as different network adapters should be developed.

What I think could be improved greatly is the support for the majority of hardware vendors like ATI, Nvidia, and all the other vendors producing hardware and supplying perfect drivers for Windows operating system, but they don't care much for Linux. Canonical are doing a great job, but the third-party support and the vendors should be paying more attention to the Linux operating system, not only with Microsoft drivers and so on.

I'd like to see better support for graphic drivers and support from the hardware lenders when they next provide an update. I believe the third-party vendors are putting their efforts in development for the operating system that has better penetration among users. Unfortunately, they're not paying too much attention because not so many people are using Linux at the moment. It's not their priority. Another aspect might be that the vendors don't like to put a lot of effort into their support and drivers for Linux, because the community that uses Linux is geared towards open source software, and the vendors are rarely happy about that. Still, most of the vendors put their major efforts into the Microsoft ecosystem. I believe it's all due to the market penetration, but it would be great if we could see improvement in this area. 

Ubuntu is on its way for big changes. The transition from the desktop environment Unity7 to Unity8 is in progress. So, I prefer to wait until Unity8 is released to answer this question.

Reducing the UA would be very helpful to reduce resource consumption. They need a less resource pack option. Currently, I am using the standard one.

The user interface could be improved.

They need to allow more Windows software to work with Linux, such as 3D games.

I think Ubuntu is not that secure.

Ubuntu could add some additional hardware support.

The documentation is very poor. It is written like a textbook.

You need a Linux operating system to be the host of the web servers. We don't use a GUI. It's not like Windows. It's not for daily users to write documents or browsing sheets or browsing the internet.

The product could be easier to manage.

It can be improved in terms of user-friendliness for inexperienced users. It also has a lot of scope for improvement in terms of deployment. It is kind of hard for inexperienced users, and the learning curve is very steep. There is not really good documentation for new professionals. Even we are using network servers to install it.

After only a week of using the solution, we haven't really found any limitations or missing features. The experience has been pretty good so far.

Right now, the solution is working quite well for us. I can't think of a feature that is lacking.

There are some drivers that are not there encoded, however, I thought that was pretty normal. They could be more comprehensive.

An easier to configure firewall would be a good add-on. 

I would like some antiviruses, since what you get on the market is not much. However, if you want to protect your network, there should be an easier way to configure security software since sometimes it can be very difficult.

I'm satisfied with Ubuntu Linux, but it's always good to improve on the performance of any product, including this one.

The solution could improve by being more user-friendly, you need to know how to use the command-line interface which you might not understand.

The solution could improve by having the user interface use fewer resources.

It should be easier and lighter. I am more experienced in working with CentOS, and I find CentOS much easier to use than Ubuntu. Ubuntu is more complicated than CentOS. Ubuntu is also heavier for hardware than centOS.

I think that the Ubuntu user interface should be improved. It could be simplified. We have not seen any real improvement in the last kernel, which we expected to happen with the latest release.  

But the user interface should be improved because it is not very user-friendly.  

it sometimes happens that when you upgrade, the network card deactivates.
the "Network-manager" network service must be restarted to allow the server to be able to reconnect to the network. this is a situation that I have experienced several times.
Therefore if it is a novice it could be compromising for him.
I think it would be important to improve this so that the network service or even any other service is not stopped after an upgrade.

I prefer to use Debian instead of Ubuntu because Debian is the main distributor. Debian is more stable than Ubuntu. In some projects, I have had some problems with Ubuntu Linux. I finally figured out the root cause. It goes back to repositories. On Ubuntu, you can use main repositories and the source of a package that you install from. If you change repositories, you will get trouble and have difficulties with Ubuntu.

Ubuntu should create some specific features, like Red Hat. Red Hat has provided many features for open-source, like FreeIPA. I can centralize the management and policy management. It's very good, like Microsoft. That has an active directory, a special directory service for the customers. 

I'm looking for enterprise features. I'm looking for specific features in the storage area, in the file system area. I'm looking for management solutions, integration solutions, like SUSE and Red Hat.

I think it should only be for the desktop. Maybe it is good idea to say goodbye to Unity and say hello again to Gnome.

When you upgrade the core of this operating system, it can crash. This is the only problem I had. It needs more stable upgrades. 

I am aware that they package some versions that are lightweight and are not so process or memory-intensive however, I would like to see an even more lightweight version because I believe it is possible.

Test automation and application maintenance could be improved. 

Better integration between the interface of the software and the operating system itself would be a benefit in the future.

In terms of what could be improved, I would say management and storage. Mostly, the storage mechanism. There have been some subsequent versions that have improved on this. But I'm talking about the version that we are currently running. We are aware that there have been some subsequent versions that have addressed this challenge.

The portal for the active directory needs to be improved. I cannot include my work station as I want to the active directory to the Microsoft domain. 

The solution could be better integrated with Microsoft.

Ubuntu Linux could improve by having better documentation because sometimes their documentation is not very good.

It can have more security.

Patch management.

The solution could be more user-friendly, as I use Mac on a day to day basis. 

It's not as easy to use as Windows by Microsoft. It could be easier to use.

The user interface could be improved, as it looks a little bit older.

If I run an application, I need it to show up in Microsoft, so Microsoft can run in Ubuntu. It needs to connect better with Microsoft products.

I think Ubuntu's performance is fine and so is its user interface. However, the latter is not as fancy as Microsoft Windows. It could be a bit fancier and easier to use. 

If they had GUI features similar to that in Windows, it would be good.

The biggest problem we are facing with Ubuntu is that we cannot have group policies and Active Directories. The Windows Active Directory is a more granular level where you can deploy the group policies, which we don't see in Ubuntu.

I would like to see the group policies and the GUI improved in the next release.

The installation of Ubuntu is somewhat complicated. It requires searching online forums and installation takes time. If there was additional training and documentation available, better support for integration, that would be helpful. The UI could be improved. 

Backoffice tools should be improved: xls and doc files should be edited with light and faster tools.

I'd like their updates to be better and some other official programs, as well as the user interface. They aren't as user-friendly as Microsoft. The solution can use a better UI.