Ubuntu Linux Reviews

I am using it for quite a lot of things. I teach at a university where we use it for radiation protection computations. On the networking side, I use it for both workstations and firewalls. I always use its latest version.

It is fast and easy to install. It also supports containers and all kinds of libraries. I can do almost everything with it. 

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.

I have been using this solution for 12 years. 

If it is administered properly, it is stable. If there are administration issues, they are kind of hard to resolve for inexperienced users.

It is scalable in terms of server cluster infrastructure, but the main issue with scalability is the hardware.

We have five to ten users in the enterprise. We also use it for every student. In terms of our plans to increase its usage, I don't know what the future brings because I see that Microsoft has also started to use Linux infrastructure.

I am not using the Enterprise support for Ubuntu. I am kind of used to it, and I know how to compile kernels and modules. It is no issue at all.

I started with BSD. It takes 10 to 15 minutes to install Ubuntu Linux.

I installed it myself.

I don't need to pay for the license.

I would recommend this solution based on the application. For a firewall, I would go for a dedicated device. For a desktop, it is okay to use.

I would rate Ubuntu Linux a ten 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.

I like that everything is in the command line. It is really helpful.

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.

I have been using Ubuntu Linux for four or five years.

We are working with the latest version.

This solution is stable. It runs smoothly in our environment and we have not been faced with any issues using it.

It's a scalable product.

We have support, but only use it on rare occasions.

They respond well to customer care.

When we raise a ticket with them, they reply to the emails. For example, if they have a tag for a particular issue they will respond to you within four hours.

We only connect with technical support when we have an issue.

As I am from IT security, there are some type-overs required. I need to use Kali Linux. 

I have also tried some penetration testing tools, which is testing that is better done using Kali Linux tools.

The initial setup is straightforward.

It takes a couple of hours to deploy.

We are currently evaluating different software solutions that we can deploy in our environment. Some that we are considering are CrowdStrike and Microsoft Defender ATP.

We are looking at the options and the features that offer us the best endpoint protection.

I would rate Ubuntu Linux a seven out of ten.

We are a solution provider and we recommend this product to our customers. We also use it internally.

Ubuntu provides us with a computer server, allowing us to combine our software code and different projects to produce graphics.

This operating system is suitable for cloud computing.

Ubuntu Linux has the advantage of performance. It runs very quickly.

This is a product that is being developed very quickly and it changes approximately every six months.

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.

I have been using Ubuntu Linux for approximately five years.

This product is used by our engineering team, which has approximately 20 engineers. We plan to continue using it in the future.

I don't know of any free technical support that is available. We get support from the knowledge base or from the website, in the section titled Download Support Center.

I have also used Oracle Linux. It is very stable and good at tasks that include data transportation, data backup, data products, and other data-related functions.

These two products are different in their design. The choice of these products depends on the needs because they are designed for different goals.

The installation of Ubuntu is easy. It takes approximately 20 minutes to deploy.

Ubuntu is an open-source Linux operating system that can be used free of charge.

Buyers can pay for services and support, but they do not have to pay for a license.

This is a product that I recommend to customers who are software developers and make use of compilers. It is very useful for this use case.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

We're still in the learning phase. However, from what I have seen in the short time I've used it, it's been rather user-friendly.

The installation is pretty straightforward.

The solution has a very good graphical user interface.

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.

We're very new to the solution. We're still learning about the product. It's only been a week or so, so far.

The stability, so far, has been good. We haven't had any issues with bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze on us. It's been very reliable so far.

We have about 20 users on the solution currently. However, I've mostly restricted the usage to just myself as I explore the solution. It's still early days. We haven't done any scaling.

While the solution is still new to us, we'll continue to use it so long as the solution itself proves to be useful to the company.

We haven't yet dealt with technical support in any way. Therefore, I can't speak to their level of knowledge or responsiveness.

I did previously use a different solution, however this was recommended to us by colleagues and we're trying it out.

The initial setup is not complex. It's pretty straightforward. We didn't have any issues implementing the product.

The deployment was pretty fast as well. We had it set up within an hour.

I handled the implementation myself. I didn't need the assistance of an integrator or consultant.

The solution isn't really expensive at this time. So far the version we are using goes, it is being used on the virtual machine. That was a free download.

We've just installed Ubuntu very recently. I'm just trying to see how it is right now. We have it installed on Windows 10 Pro. While we use the on-premises version, we're very interested in exploring the cloud.

I'm not sure just yet if I would recommend the product to others simply due to the fact that I've basically just started using it. I need at least a month of working on it in order to be able to tell if it works how we hope it will and if I would recommend it to others.

Right now, I would recommend the solution at a six out of ten. I need more time to really analyze it properly.

The most valuable feature of this solution is that Linux has cost-effective licenses.

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.

I have been working with Ubuntu Linux for eight years.

Ubuntu is stable but when you running with 1,000 people or more, you have to go with a high-speed directory, and we don't have the same control thatwe have with Windows.

Ubuntu pricing is reasonable.

We moved to Linux for financial obligations.

Ubuntu Linux is good as long as you have a good resource to manage it. For us, it's really good.

I would rate this product a seven out of ten.

We run our personal applications or non-mission-critical applications on Ubuntu Linux to cut the cost. 

The feature that I have found the most valuable is that it is open source. It is also very easy to manage. We can manage it ourselves.

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.

I have been using Ubuntu Linux for three years.

It is stable. I didn't face any issues.

It is scalable. We have big servers on it. 

We have four to five people directly working on Ubuntu Linux. They are a part of the System Admin team.

I have used Kali Linux as well. If you want to go for an open-source solution, Ubuntu Linux is better. It is a bit better to use.

The initial setup was pretty straightforward. It took about 20 minutes. 

I implemented it myself. The deployment duration depends on the scenario. For small deployments, only one person is required.

We have on-cloud and on-premises deployments. I am working on the core features, and I haven't faced any critical issues with it. We use it for our non-critical applications. We don't use it for any critical applications, such as financial applications, because we do not get any official support for it. For critical applications, Red Hat is a better option.

I would rate Ubuntu Linux a nine out of ten.

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.