Ubuntu Linux Reviews

I use Ubuntu Linux just for testing, e.g. as a workstation. I also use it for running some applications.

Ubuntu Linux is user-friendly. Patching and patch management for the system is also good.

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've been using Ubuntu Linux for more than five years.

From a stability perspective, Ubuntu Linux is quite stable. This is the reason I'm using it at home, e.g. for the lab. When I deploy it, it's quite stable, and I don't need to do anything else.

The initial setup for Ubuntu Linux was straightforward.

I implemented the system myself, and it took me less than an hour to deploy it.

The Ubuntu Linux version that I use is free. I just download it, install it on a VM, and that's it. It's because I don't require any support, so I don't need to pay.

I evaluated RedHat and Debian.

I have a personal experience with Ubuntu Linux in virtual machines.

The system can be deployed on-premises or on cloud, and this will depend on the testing required. We usually use the latest version of Ubuntu Linux.

I'm not using the system in a production environment, so its scalability is not something I care about.

I have not contacted technical support for Ubuntu Linux. I fix any issues myself, e.g. I go to their website and find the answers online.

I can certainly recommend Ubuntu Linux to other people who may want to start using it.

I'm rating Ubuntu Linux an eight out of ten.

We use this solution for our NFS environment. I'm a system administrator and we're customers of Ubuntu Linux. 

Compared to other solutions on the market, this is a relatively suitable and good product which is stable and easy to use. Ubuntu currently serves our OpenShift environment.

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've been using this solution for six months. 

The solution is stable. 

If I need to increase the disk on Ubuntu it's just hard for us to increase in the environment so scalability is not so easy. 

We don't pay for technical support so we can't use it in Turkey. 

I've used Red Hat Enterprise and I prefer working in that enterprise environment so I prefer that solution. 

If you have two different versions, one version can't be installed on the VMware environment. It is not suitable. I carried out the deployment myself and it took quite some time and a while to understand the program. We have an admin person and an engineer dealing with Ubuntu. 

Red Hat Enterprise is very widespread in Turkey and very few use Ubuntu. I work in an enterprise environment and I prefer Red Hat Enterprise Linux because we can easily get support. Red Hat is very widespread and Red Hat support is very responsive. I don't think I would recommend Ubuntu for anyone working in an enterprise environment. I think we'll be shifting to Red Hat at some point. 

I would rate Ubuntu Linux a six out of 10. 

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Our primary use case is to have as an operating system, to install some applications.

The most valuable features are stability and updates. We are not using the interface, the interface of the OS, we are using it as the server. We actually sync it through SSH and we deploy our application, so we don't have access to do it. The updates are very helpful and the way they update their OS is very helpful.

I think the operating system is very stable and this is a major advantage.

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. 

I have a few years of experience with Ubuntu Linux.

It depends more on the hardware layer, not on the operating system. If it can grow on the hardware, CPU memories, then we can put more stress on it. But usually, when we configure it, we configure it on the VM machine and then I start the OS and the application. When we want to expand, we create a new VM, and we start a new Ubuntu OS and we deploy another application. This is how we expand.

We have around 500 to 600 users. We are a university and we have a lot of staff here. 

We don't use any external support. 

The documentation is very useful with any kind of issues and we easily find a solution on the net variety suite. That is why also we choose Ubuntu. Because any kind of problem or any kind of implementation issue, we have a solution, we are able to find a solution on the net.

We usually acquire a solution application and then we deploy it. It is a matter of one hour or two.

I would recommend Ubuntu Linux. 

I would rate it an eight out of ten. 

Although Ubuntu is based on Debian Linux, it ships with (more or less) current software. In addition, there a are a lot of community-based repositories which can easily be added.

Since Ubuntu provides LTS releases with 5 years of support, you can have longer server lifecycles without having to worry about security patches.

One of the greatest things about Ubuntu is the possibility of upgrading to the newer release on the fly - no reinstallation is needed.

Other great things/features include: Great AppArmor support, huge official package repository from Canonical and the community, decent hardware support.

Ubuntu powers many servers in most of the companies I worked for. Maintaining them was - in most cases - easy and painless.

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.

I have been working with Ubuntu since 2010.

Deployment was always straight-forward; however, upgrading to latest releases (e.g. from 12.04 to 14.04) could mean that you have to adapt your system management tools since some package names can change.

Not with Ubuntu itself, but some software being packaged by the community for Ubuntu is not built with optimum parameters. E.g. I had many struggles with the libvirt/KVM builds for Ubuntu.

Before using Ubuntu, I was used to Debian and their concept of having rock-solid (but also very old) software in their repositories. Ubuntu, however, is not so extreme in this point: It is stable, but the provided software is not thaaaat old. In addition, Ubuntu/Canonical are eager to provide at least some management tools.

The initial setup of Ubuntu is very easy.

I also like Red Hat, CentOS and Fedora; however, upgrading to latest releases without reinstalling the complete OS seems only to be painless with Ubuntu (please correct me if I am wrong, maybe it always went well for you?).

Try Ubuntu. Seriously. If you are looking for a good Linux distribution with a large community and lots of packages, Ubuntu is the way to go. However, if you need management tools (e.g. for automated installation, patch management etc.) you might have to invest some time in getting open-source projects involved or by writing your own solutions (if you don't want to use Landscape).

Ubuntu Linux is an operating system and we use it for day-to-day operations.

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.

I have been using Ubuntu Linux for approximately a few years.

The solution is scalable, it is open-source, and can be developed. You are able to install it on many different systems.

I have used Debian and Microsoft Windows previously.

The installation of the Ubuntu Linux tool is approximately 10 minutes.

I did the implementation of the solution myself.

I am very satisfied with Ubuntu Linux and I would recommend it to others.

I rate Ubuntu Linux a nine out of ten.

There aren't exactly any particular features, but in general, it's the most compatible for us.

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.

I've been using it for that past six years.

It is very stable and there are supports for the newer drivers, or support from the community and from the Ubuntu on help documents.

I have not used Ubuntu technical support directly. I've mostly used the community and documents available.

I don't use the enterprise version. I use the open source version, so it doesn't have any licenses.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

My advice would be that Ubuntu is very widely used and you can easily get help and technical guidance from community members.  Support for the hardware drivers are there.

The use case for Ubuntu is not the information system production environment for the operating system. It is used to run applications.

We are not utilizing Ubuntu in critical applications.

Ubuntu Linux is developer-oriented.

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

We have been using Ubuntu Linux for 10 years.

Ubuntu Linux is a stable solution.

It's a scalable product, but not the best. We have 2,000 systems. 

We have not contacted technical support.

With an expert, the installation was easy. We had no issues with the installation.

We completed the installation ourselves.

Ubuntu Linux is free, but you can pay for a supported version that is better.

I would recommend Ubuntu for development and to run applications that are non-information system critical.

I would rate Ubuntu Linux a ten out of ten.