Ubuntu Linux Reviews

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.

I use this solution on my desktop.

The most valuable feature is the user interface. The user experience is really good.

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 stability of this solution is ok. The previous version of this solution had some glitches. When I locked the system, I would come back and it would not unlock. I had to remotely log in and kill something before it would unlock. After the update it was ok.

I haven't used Ubuntu as a server operating system. Obviously, Linux is scalable because we have been using Red Hat and other distributions, but with respect to Ubuntu, I haven't used it on the server side very much.

I have never contacted technical support.

We do not use Ubuntu Linux in our production environment. For production, we use Red Hat and similar ones, such as Oracle Enterprise Linux. On the server-side, we haven't introduced Ubuntu yet.

With Ubuntu, I think the recent versions have pretty much everything in place. Some other operating systems may not take all of the hardware devices and drivers, but here it picks up most of the things, so I don't see anything wrong in there. The user experience is good, the interface is good. It's all good.

Being a desktop user, I can say that using this solution on a desktop is a very good choice. Ubuntu also supports a cloud-based installation, so it should be a good choice there as well.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

My primary use case is for office work and developing software. 

The most valuable feature is that it's developer-friendly and easily accessible. Like any other Linux operating system, you have access to open sources, all the necessary tooling, and anything that helps developers do their work. I'm no Linux guru, but Ubuntu offers packages that I find easy to use. There are other options for people who are very skilled with Linux, but this solution has the perfect balance of having enough technical requirements to meet your needs while still being usable. It doesn't require you to be so technically proficient that you need to recompile kernels or anything like that. It's a Linux operating system for normal people. 

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. 

I have been using this solution for five years. 

This solution is stable. 

I have never contacted technical support, but I probably will in the future. They offer very good services. 

I use Windows 10 because I have to, due to the programs I have that came with it, but I use Ubuntu on top of that. 

The initial setup was very quick. It is easy to install. 

I implemented myself. 

I'm aware of the paid services that they offer and provide technical support for, which are very good. Down the road, I will use some of them, specifically the service that automatically patches the central core of the operating system because it seems useful. Another service they used to have is a paid networking service. The services they offer are useful, but they depend on your particular situation and requirements. I would consider paying for them when a situation calls for them, but I don't need them right now. 

You don't need to pay for licensing. 

Some of my colleagues use Mint, but it's a matter of preference and specific to each person. 

I recommend Ubuntu Linux, specifically for developers. 

I would rate Ubuntu Linux a nine out of ten. 

I am using this solution as an operating system.

Some of the main features of this solution are it is less prone to viruses since most viruses are written for Microsoft software, and it is easy to use.

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.

I have been using this solution for approximately three years.

The solution is stable.

I have found the solution to be scalable.

I have used Apple OS, Microsoft Window, and most recently started using Linux Mint.

The installation is easy and it takes approximately one hour. 

One of the benefits is you can have a dual boot of your system to allow both Ubuntu Linux and Microsoft Windows to be used.

I did the implementation of the solution myself.

This solution is free.

I would recommend this solution to others it is very stable.

I rate Ubuntu Linux an eight out of ten.

I primarily used Ubuntu Linux as a DNS server. I was running other types of servers, as well.

What I like best is the way in which packages are managed.

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

I have been using Ubuntu Linux for more than 15 years.

All Linux systems, including Ubuntu, are stable.

This is a scalable product. We have more than 100 Linux users.

The support available for Ubuntu is okay.

Prior to Ubuntu, I worked with Sun Unix for servers.

I have made the switch to using CentOS primarily because of the interface. It is more lightweight than Ubuntu.

The initial setup and installation are easy, and not difficult to complete. It should not take more than 15 minutes to deploy.

Our in-house team of two engineers is responsible for deployment and maintenance.

Ubuntu Linux is open-source and available to use free of charge.

Overall, this is a good operating system and I recommend it.

I would rate this solution a ten out of ten.

Ubuntu MATE provides me with a complete OS experience, so I don't have to switch between multiple OS for my work; I can do my development, usual browsing and accessing tools on the same machine.

I mostly use the OS for development purposes by running IDE like PyCharm. I also use the OS to connect to other machines in our development environment.

We moved from Ubuntu 12 to Ubuntu 16 recently, owing to the various new fixes that were shipped with its new version.

Ubuntu is the standard deviation OS in our environment and we have built our own image that the developers can just download and begin using it.

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.

I have been using it for the last four months. Before this, I was using Ubuntu 12.

We have encountered stability issues. I find it less stable when I am using Ubuntu as a virtual machine.

There were no major issues with its scalability.

We have never used technical support.

We were using Ubuntu 12 and we switched to Ubuntu 16, so as to solve the performance issues and version upgrade for development purposes.

The setup was straightforward. We found it easy to set up version 16 compared to version 12.

MATE Desktop is most suited if you want to run Ubuntu 16 in a virtual environment.

We configured it as a third-party log collector, receiving Postfix gateway logs. Additionally, we removed the on-site and electric agents. I use it for a unified firewall solution and have installed an identification package and other similar tools.

The solution's stability could be improved.

I have been using Ubuntu Linux for three months.

The product is stable.

I rate the solution’s stability an eight out of ten.

We never had issues with support.

I have used Kali Linux before.

The initial setup is easy and takes an hour to complete. To deploy, download the ISO file and put it in a firmware and configuration server.

I deploy the solution by myself.

Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

Ubuntu Linux is easy to start, and MicroK8s is easy to deploy. Plug into the back-end storage and networking is also easy.

It is good to start with 3-4 nodes, but hard to scale. For production grades like 20 or 100 nodes, we go with the RedHat for on-premise.

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.

I have been using Ubuntu Linux as an end user for six years.

The tool could be more stable.

The product’s scalability is not better. RedHat is better. We’ve more than ten users using this product. We plan to increase the usage when there is a requirement or specification.

The initial setup is easy. Deploying OS is fast and takes less than a day.

We can do the installation on a small scale without consultants, but when it comes to scale.

Ubuntu is an OS. You need the specification, storage, network, IP, etc., and deploy it by orchestration or just do the standalone installation infrastructure.

If the customer wants to start, there is no license required. It is all free, but they must purchase the production license.

Mostly, the product is on-premise, but in some cases, we managed to deploy applications in the cloud.

The solution is easy and simple to start because of complete documentation. When you go for production, we must purchase the hardware and OS license.

Overall, I rate the solution a seven out of ten.