Ubuntu Linux Reviews

We are using Ubuntu Linux for many purposes, such as running applications for our server.

The solution is more secure than competitors such as Microsoft Windows.

The solution could improve by being more user-friendly.

I have been using Ubuntu Linux for approximately three years.

I have found Ubuntu Linux to be stable.

The solution is scalable.

We have six people using this solution in my organization.

We have used Microsoft Windows Server and Windows 10.

The installation is easy, it takes approximately 30 minutes.

I would recommend this solution to others.

I rate Ubuntu Linux a ten out of ten.

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.

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.

I'm responsible for building and providing container environments, and, therefore, I need to install and configure Kubernetes clusters on Linux operating systems. We use Ubuntu as a base operating system for the Kubernetes cluster and container environments.

It is easy to use, performs great, and is stable and scalable.

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.

I've been using Ubuntu and Linux systems for around three years.

I work with simple environments like a laboratory, and it is stable because there are no huge workloads on that server.

In general, I think Ubuntu servers are very stable for providing cloud native applications.

I think that Ubuntu Linux is a scalable solution.

We used Windows Server 2012 and 2016 before switching to Ubuntu Linux.

Installation is very simple and straightforward, but if you want to install more than one server simultaneously, for the Linux distribution, you would need to use an automation server. However, if the Linux community provides specific tools built into Linux like, for example, WDS Microsoft, then you will be able to simultaneously install multiple Linux operating systems on multiple servers.

In comparison to Red Hat, I think Ubuntu offers more security, scalability, and better performance, as well as better GUI and administration.

On a scale from one to ten, I would rate Ubuntu Linux at eight. 

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.

There are many features I like about this solution, but one that stands out is that it allows me to easily install new packages and to have recent packages available. 

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.

Ubuntu Linus has always been very stable for us.

This solution is very scalable on the server with some add-ons like like containers, Docker containers and kubernetes. We are a relatively small development company with only three staff members. But I've installed this for customers with hundreds of users supported by the Ubuntu server. 

I've never had to use their technical support, so that just shows how good the product is. 

I used Debian before, but newer versions and solutions are out there and we've decided to start using Ubuntu Linux instead. 

When I first installed it, it was fairly easy. But when I installed it onto my new laptop, it was rather complex because it involved adding all the drivers. 

I use the free version, so I don't have any license fees.

I will give this solution a ten 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.

I have used versions 16, 18 and 20, mainly the first two. 

We mostly use the solution for development purposes and also test it on products before and after their release. 

The solution has a unique flavor. It is difficult to hack. It has good security features and, from a developer's point of view, provides greater control, including in respect of the processes, internals, networking and IO and voice usage, everything really. 

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. 

We have been using Ubuntu Linux for more than three or four years. I have been using it for 20. 

When it comes to the stability of Ubuntu Linux versus that of Windows, the former, in respect of developer machines, is less energy consuming, which translates into a longer shelf life. 

The stability is one of the reasons that we use the solution. 

The solution is scalable and easy when it comes to the storage RAM. There is no need to do anything extra. 

One of the reasons we use the solution is for its scalability. 

We have not required canonical support. There is a good online community for support issues which may arise and, as things are easy and straightforward, I generally rely on Google. 

In the past we used RHC Fuse, SUSE and Unix, as Ubuntu was not an option. 

Nowadays, SUSE is considered antiquaited and Linux Ubuntu new. 

The initial setup is straightforward and very quick. 

I do not believe we have required any staff for the deployment and maintenance as of yet. So far, everything has been straightforward and easy. 

The main advantage of Unix is that it's free. 

Windows Unix and Ubuntu provide a free license and one need just pay for the hardware. Mac is costly. Ubuntu provides a cheaper and better option. 

There are those who prefer Windows for its UI features, but I am not one of them. 

When it comes to the stability of Ubuntu Linux versus that of Windows, the former, in respect of developer machines, is less energy consuming, which translates into a longer shelf life. 

We prefer both Mac and Unix. 

The main advantage of Unix is that it's free. 

Windows Unix and Ubuntu provide a free license and one need just pay for the hardware. Mac is costly. Ubuntu provides a cheaper and better option. 

However, the price criteria is not why we use Ubuntu Linux, but because it is scalable, stable and developer-friendly. 

Around 50 to 70 percent of our staff make use of Unix and Mac, because we are all developers and like these solutions. 

The salespeople make use of Recruitment HR. They use Windows, as do some of the junior staff. However, most of the developers and all of the senior ones use Unix, Ubuntu and Linux. 

I cannot think of any particular advice I would impart to others looking into implementing the solution. 

As I cannot think of any issues I have with Ubuntu Linux, I rate it as a ten out of ten.