Ubuntu Linux Reviews

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 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.

I find the stability of the solution the most valuable aspect. It's also easier software than Microsoft Windows.

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.

The solution is stable. 

I cannot answer this question. I haven't tried to scale the solution. Directory as a workstation is used by a few hundred, but all servers are for Oracle databases. And that users work on Windows work stations, but with Oracle client issues, databases on the servers. But we don't plan to scale.

We don't deal with technical support. If we need answers, we usually use the internet.

We previously used 3BD and Oracle Linux. We switched because this solution is more user-friendly.

The initial setup was pretty easy.

We did not evaluate other options.

I would rate this solution at 8 out of 10. 

For me, its different user interfaces is not a good idea because sometimes it's hard to find the best interface. It's better to have one, but an excellent one. I think the stability is very good.

I find the Linux community very valuable and the fact it is open source. So it's free and I use it without any problems.

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.

I find the solution stable.

For me, the solution is scalable.

I prefer to use the community, rather than technical support. I'm able to solve my problems using the community. It's easy to find answers to my questions.

We use Covernity for cloud infrastructure, but for disk management, I use Unbuntu.

I would advise those thinking about using Ubuntu to be patient and don't switch to Windows.

I would rate the solution as 7 out of 10, because some platforms aren't as easy for users.

I used it before on my laptop, and I was quite happy with it. I had to change back to Windows 8 when we got a new product which is not supported by Linux. To show our product to our customers, I had to go back to Windows. 

I still have an older laptop which is using the Ubuntu version on it. I am still quite happy with it. I have not had so many compatibility problems between Ubuntu and Windows as I have had with Mac.

Our biggest issue is cybersecurity. In 2013, we decided to protect our network with a Linux server. If there is a virus going into the network, it has to pass through an Ubuntu server, which can't be infected by the virus. So, there are less viruses on our systems.

Linux is more stable than Windows. 

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.

It is very stable. Previously, I never had a problem. 

Though, I have a problem now. I tried to install Microsoft SQL Server on a new Ubuntu machine, and it is not working at 100 percent. This is following Microsoft's install instructions, not Ubuntu's.

I had a customer who was using NGINX running on Ubuntu servers in three different data centers. After getting more servers behind these NGINX Ubuntu servers, we had to resize everything. This was easily done in a very short amount of time, and we were able to expand the capacity too.

I have never used the technical support.

The initial setup is quite straightforward. Sometimes, I have to read a little bit. I have quite a big eBook with how to's, which I wrote myself. 

It is very cheap. It didn't cost anything to download a Ubuntu server version and install it on an already existing Dell server.

Cisco or Juniper.

Most important criteria when selecting a vendor: sales support.

• Surprised with the better use of resources for old machines.
• The GUI is easy and friendly.
• The environment was a test machine with Intel i586 (recommended).

Improved on the recycling of old computers, but most users ask for a solution for new equipment. 

Use of the tools for systems and software to test functionalities. The integration with other applications, like Chrome or Firefox, works excellent for users navigating and test browsing.

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.

Old equipment works for at least two or three years more, which means a significant savings.

With Web services, many DevOps require different configurations that could cause problems with each project's needs. We are able to supply a cheap, stable server that can cover the DevOps team, using standards we can apply very easily.

RTO with the use of templating support for VMware for fast deployment of recovery or new systems, with the least amount work needed on custom settings, within application installed from install repositories. Shorter overall time with the vetted packages. Normally install and go. Time from Dev to Prod has been reduced from months to weeks in most cases.

Each server has been installed to serve as a solution for a service needed. LAMP seems to be the most used package over all.

Stability of our systems has only improved since moving from CentOS to Ubuntu LTS.

Scale would normally be limited to the hardware. As with most Linux distros, HA packages for most apps are available in the repositories and many great support  forums with how-to's.

With the great support forums available, I have not needed to contact support as of yet.

We still have a mix of servers and must support our legacy systems that range from Red Hat, CentOS, and FreeBSD. As time goes, on we require more stable services with updated security, and we replace them with Ubuntu LTS to unify our systems to a standard that is easy to support and deploy.

With all the systems our network requires, this was one of easiest deployments thus far.

Many other Linux distros were selected for testing, but Debian core was very stable. However, the Debian distro itself was very annoying, missing many basic packages, and had little to no support for template deployment in VMware vCenter 5.5 to current.

We are a non-profit consumer with a small budget, hence the need for a stable, low-cost server to provide services to our users.

While I would recommend Ubuntu LTS (stable v16.04.3 at time of this review) try other distros to see how long it takes to deploy, and how much tweaking it will take to implement your project. 

The Ubuntu LTS server is very stable. I use Ubuntu on most of my servers and I'm very pleased.

Updates on packages are the main reason that I use the Ubuntu server. With this tool, my servers are up-to-date and secured. It is easy to use. The Ubuntu server is good for new admins. We use it for HAProxy load balancers, to database, and web servers with high availability.

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.

I have been using Ubuntu for five or six years. I use it mostly on web servers.

It is very stable. For all those years, I never had any problems.

I've never used technical support. I use askubuntu.com which is free and it is great!

I used SlackWare, then Debian. My most important servers are still using Debian, but the other ones are Ubuntu servers.

The setup was straightforward. It is pretty easy to use for beginners to advanced admins.

Use Linux. It is free!

We did not evaluate other options.

Ubuntu is a very stable Linux. I highly recommend it.