Ubuntu Linux Reviews

I don't use Ubuntu very much, but I have been testing it for approximately ten years. 

There are some that are running their data centers off of Ubuntu.

Ubuntu Linux can be used for anything. Anything that you can do on Windows, you can do in Ubuntu. For example Microsoft Office, Microsoft is really famous for, their Windows platforms, and Office suite. 

In the past, the open-source community had alternative software such as Open Office or even another project called Libre Office. These open-source solutions provided an office suite similar to Microsoft Office. However, with the new Office 365, you don't need Windows to work on Office these days. Outlook, PowerPoint, Excel are all web-based. You can run Ubuntu and open your Firefox browser and use it.

The best way and the easiest way to get into Linux is with Ubuntu because they provide lots of hardware support out of the box.

You don't have to go into the deep parts with Ubuntu to install and configure it. There are many, ready-made guides online for Ubuntu, which is good. 

The Linux distribution is the best for laptops. If you are using laptops, you don't want to be running Oracle Linux there or Red Hat. It's going to be Ubuntu.

I like the easiness of Ubuntu. Ubuntu is a great product. It's awesome.

Canonical as a company, who is responsible for Ubuntu, is doing a great job at making Ubuntu very easy, plug and play, and they are good at porting applications to Ubuntu. If you're talking about Linux, the easiest Linux distribution you can encounter is Ubuntu.

The distribution with the most packages available to it is Ubuntu.

In terms of user-friendliness, Ubuntu is the best it can get in the Linux world. To say that it could be improved would be unfair. They are the ones bridging the user-friendliness gap in the Linux world.

The main distinguishing feature between Ubuntu and other Linux distribution is that Ubuntu has excelled at user-friendliness. It's very easy to use.

Ubuntu, as a distribution itself, is filled up with a lot of bloated software. That is the main reason why enterprise companies, mainly in the US, prefer to go with Red Hat, and SUSE is preferred mainly in Europe. 

Red Hat and SUSE provide less bloat on their OS.

Ubuntu is based on Debian, which is the first Linux distribution to ever come into existence, or the first mainstream Linux distribution. Debian also is bloated with a lot of software and sometimes some of the software is old. 

I would love to see Ubuntu strip down. They have a server edition that is stripped down.

Instead of having a billion different distributions, why can't there just be one? This would improve Linux and I would love to see this happen.

One of the reasons people don't use Ubuntu on servers is because they are not as secure as Red Hat. They could be more secure, but for them to be more secure, you need to strip the bloatware. Bloatware is when you have several applications that are not needed and already installed in the operating system. They have a server edition and that comes stripped of the bloatware.

I have been working with Ubuntu Linux for more than ten years.

I have used the latest edition of Ubuntu Linux. If I am not mistaken, the latest release is 20.04 LTS.

Stability is a broad topic. Ubuntu is stable. 

Scalability? It Depends. It's Linux, you can do anything with it. 

It depends on what you mean by scalability. You have to be very precise. If you're talking about data center and scalability, then, yes, it's scalable. 

There are open-source projects that are being used, whether it be with Ubuntu or with Red Hat or with SUSE, to scale data centers, or to establish a scale-out architecture. It is possible to achieve scalability with Ubuntu, depending on the scenario. 

With any other Linux distribution, you can achieve quite the same.

There is a large community online.

I'm using something called Debian. Ubuntu is based on Debian Linux.

I have used many operating systems. I have used Debian, CentOS, Fedora, Red Hat, and SUSE.

I have also used distributions that have very weird names as well.

Linux has always been a technology for technical people. Ubuntu bridges that gap. With Ubuntu, you don't need to know the technical parts of it very well to install it on a laptop and you can use Ubuntu without having any Linux knowledge.

It is very straightforward and can be installed anywhere. That's the convenience of it. 

For example, if tomorrow you face an issue and you Google it online, you will find many people who face the same issue and will provide workarounds or resolutions for the problem.

It is very easy to install.

The time it takes to deploy depends on the hardware you are installing it on, but normally it is 20 to 30 minutes to install onto a laptop or a server.

You can install it yourself. It is similar to installing Windows. There is no difference. You burn the ISO image to the USB, boot the server or the laptop and follow the instructions. You click the "next" button until it is complete and you are good to go. You give it your password, the settings that you would like, and that's it.

Ubuntu is a free product. 

If I am not mistaken, you can purchase support contracts that are available from Ubuntu.

You can always purchase Ubuntu, use it as often as you would like, and you can get enterprise support. 

Canonical has its licensing scheme, but I think the product is free to use. 

It has a GPL license, (General Public License). This license is always and will always be free to use. 

I am not familiar with the prices because I never had to contact Canonical for support and inquired about how much it would cost for their support. 

In general, you can always download their software and install it at any time for free and use it for free, according to the GPL license.

I am mainly a free VM Linux advocate. I love open-source products in general. 

At home, I have a server I'm running Linux on. I'm a Linux open-source enthusiast with more than 10 years of experience with multiple Linux distributions as a hobby. 

In my line of business, I interact with Linux environments a lot and Unix space environments in general.

I would recommend Ubuntu for anyone who's trying to learn Linux. 

For anyone who is not technical but wants a free operating system on their computer, I would definitely recommend Ubuntu.

I think there's something that needs to be clarified; Ubuntu shouldn't be compared to other distributions. These are just distributions. In the end, they share the same kernel. That is the thing with Linux. Linux is not a complete operating system. I will take the kernel, I will bundle it with a bunch of applications and then I will release it to the public and say that this is a distribution, which is not an operating system. 

I would recommend that it be compared based on the kernel, not on distribution to distribution. Ubuntu was made for something. It was made to be user-friendly, it was made for laptops. It is doing a great job on that. 

No other Linux distribution is doing as good of a job on that. For example, Red Hat or Oracle Linux, are not good on laptops, but they are good for servers. Red Hat is really good on enterprise servers.

If you are going to run any data centers that are all based on Linux, it should be based on Red Hat or SUSE. If you are running any Oracle databases or Oracle applications, it would be better to run them on Oracle Linux, even though Oracle Linux and Red Hat share the same binaries. 

There is no difference between the commands in Red Hat and Oracle Linux.

Linux is a messed up world. Everybody has their own agenda, their own thing and it's basically the same. If you go to Ubuntu with Oracle Linux in the back end, it's the exact same. 

This is the biggest nightmare with the Linux industry or the Linux world, that every day there is a new Linux distribution.

It's great. I would rate Ubuntu Linux and eight out of 10. 

It's a great product, very easy to install. It provides an alternative for Windows. 

Some people don't want to pay Microsoft or can't afford Microsoft, they want to have their own operating system solo on their hardware. Ubuntu provides that and gives you the option to give you support for it.

We primarily use the solution for data storage. 

The data storage capabilities are great.

We love the fact that this solution is open-source. It's free to use.

The product can scale.

The solution is stable. 

The solution is easy to install.

I can't really speak to any missing features.

There are some costs on offer that could be lower.

The learning curve is quite high for non-technical users. Therefore, it's not a suitable solution for a general office environment.

I've been using the solution for five years. It's been a while, although I don't use it too much.

The stability is very good. We have found that there aren't any bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable.

The solution is quite scalable. If you need to expand it, you can do so as a company. 

It's the base of our data platform. 70,000 people are using it. The IT team alone is 5,000 to 6,000 people. 

I've never dealt with technical support directly. I can't speak to how helpful or responsive they are, as I have never called them for assistance.

We have two major operating systems: Microsoft and Linux. 

The solution is quite straightforward and easy to install. It's not too complex or difficult. However, I cannot speak to how long it takes to deploy.

The solution is open-source. I'm not sure if we pay for any licensing or services and if we do, I am not sure of the exact costs. It's not a part of my responsibilities.  

We use both cloud and on-premises deployment methods. 

I'm not sure which specific versions we are using and if they are the latest or not. 

I'd rate the solution at a nine out of ten. We've been quite satisfied with the product so far. It's been great.

I'd recommend the solution to other users and companies. I wouldn't recommend it if you were deploying it as an office environment, however, for the data platform, it's perfect.

I use Ubuntu Linux for server administration and to manage network traffic. I set up a Linux server and router with all traffic through ease. I could limit the band rate limits of users in university. These are the main use cases. I also used Ubuntu with ZoneMinder Software. It's open-source software and we use about 700 CCTV cameras, which are IP-based. We deployed this on our servers for use on our own two operating systems. Other use cases include using it with the base cloud. I set up an openness patch on the Ubuntu Operating System. I'm familiar with Bash Scripting, Python Scripting, and the system programming in C and C++, but C and C++ programming languages are not my recent activities. Most of my working system is Linux Scripting or with Python. Actually, I'm recently working with Ansible to automate my jobs and my Linux experiences. Ubuntu provides for all of these activities. I also used it for OpenStack.We are hosting providers and a service company. Half of our services are based on CentOS, but they are going to migrate to Ubuntu as they are using services that Ubuntu provides. We are going to use Ansible to manage Ubuntu servers using the provided automation. We have been deploying OpenStack in an industrial IT company in Iran and now we are going to add special storage as a block device for our private cloud in Iran.

Many years ago, I used to compile Linux Kernels and operating systems. In those days, I had a lot of problems with compiling from scratch and it was so time-consuming. When I got a job in the industry, I faced new problems. So I found that may be using a new operating system may be a way forward, and that is how I came to start using Ubuntu. Performance, security and manageability are my main reasons for choosing Ubuntu. For performance, I can tune as needed. The security aspect has good features and support. There is a free security bug system. This is really good and helpful for the organization, to identify any security issues in the system. We have about 20 to 200 users in our company. Most of them use Ubuntu as a base system and all of, or may actually half of our servers are Ubuntu based. We use OpenStack code, and we have a data centre with about 150 servers of DL306 HP and set up Ubuntu on them.

There are many good automation features in Ubuntu. For example, there is a new version of Netplan Fortune which is a network manager and it is very good at managing a network of virtual machines. Ubuntu is optimized, which makes it really nice, as we can optimize Ubuntu as much as we want. For example, I had a good experience in traffic management, as I could optimize the system and Linux to make it efficient. Ubuntu is easy to obtain information for because there is a lot of documentation, and there is also a large community where you can have questions answered. Linux systems like Ubuntu and Centos enable you to work quickly, and easily. This includes installing a lot of programs, easily, as and when you need them. For example, when we are deploying the OpenStack operating system, we can use many sources, such as Galera Cluster. All of these packages are pre-compiled and pre-deployed on operating systems like Ubuntu.

The new releases of OpenStack are much faster than Ubuntu. However, the commitment of the OpenStack project is not supported in Ubuntu in the first instance. If the Ubuntu community can package and manage new releases of OpenStack packages, it will be really good. Management monitoring and interface could be better. I also feel it could be improved overall in terms of the dashboard, technical support, pricing, stability, scalability, and performance. They could try to package more new releases of OpenStack, and that would be much better.

Personally, I have been working 15 years in Linux including a role as a Linux System Administrator. I have experience in Linux concepts including system programming and cloud computing recently. I also know about storage systems. OpenStack is the last thing I have been working on, deploying to the cloud about 5 years ago. It is the main product I've been working with. I do not have experience in Red Hat Operating System, but Debian, Ubuntu, Census are the main operating systems I have been working with.

The stability of Ubuntu is good. The most important aspect is that you can use the LTS versions of Ubuntu. We can have upgrades of software for many years and obtain support from Ubuntu. Stability is important for a Linux administrator In general Ubuntu or even CentOS does not have any problems with stability and you can use it for many years. I have used it for 3 or 4 years continuously and I did not encounter a serious issue at that time.

I have set up and deployed Ubuntu with Ubuntu MAAS installation. This was a very useful service that Ubuntu offered to us. I deployed my server with my coworkers and we set up many operating systems at the data centres within a few minutes. Scalability in terms of a service layer is really good. You can install and deploy on many different types of hardware. Most of my experiences are setting and deploying Ubuntu on HP generation of 7, 8 and 9 servers, from the DL38 server, HP DL38 to DL36, 316 servers. We use it as much as we want. Regarding the scalability of Ubuntu, most of our coworkers are using Ubuntu as client servers. They are based in Iran. Ubuntu-based operating systems are really popular in Iran.

As we are in Iran and because of sanctions, we don't have a support opportunity. So we try to use it to learn what we can and consult the documentation. We don't have technical support here and we have to support it ourselves. I'm using most of my time to read the documentation and fix problems. We don't have technical support in Iran because of sanctions.

I have previously been involved with Centos. My most experience is in private clouds, and I've been deploying Ubuntu Linux and OpenStack. I set this up at the Ferdowsi University of Mashhad for high-performance computing. However, that was about five years ago. Last year in my new company, I deployed OpenStack for a public cloud. And we are going to use it for some of our customers.

Also, partitioning and deploying Ubuntu in the cloud is really simple and easy. We create a base image of Ubuntu or maybe use a pre-built image built in Asia from ubuntu.com to our cloud. I have a lot of experience from many years ago installing Ubuntu and partitioning using LVM partitioning. For example, Ubuntu supports several files systems for use with products such as Excel. These are the main file systems I use in Ubuntu and LVM management in Ubuntu is really simple. Ubuntu installation is really simple, even for newbie users. The installation of drivers can sometimes be difficult, but otherwise, it is an easy setup.

I prefer to use an open-source license rather than proprietary licenses. Ubuntu is very well documented. It is also manageable and financially affordable.

We previously evaluated Centos and OpenStack.

Ubuntu has improved driver support and the installation of Ubuntu is really fast and easy. I recommend it to everyone. I would recommend Ubuntu over any other operating system. Ubuntu is useful for a variety of challenges, and issues. I would rate Ubuntu as 9 out of 10. It has good support and can be deployed on a cloud such as OpenStack. Ubuntu thinks about its customers and really helps them to achieve what they want. The freely available support resources of Ubuntu are really good. The good use of documentation and community forums are the major things that Ubuntu has succeeded. Ubuntu has done a good job of supporting their releases of lifetime services. I think it's a little bit better than CentOS.

We primarily use it for our personal applications. We use it in our day-to-day work. 

It's easy to deploy.  We can deploy it whenever we want. 

It's great to use with the Linux system. They work well together. 

If you know what you want to program, they make it very easy to do so. 

The solution is very stable. It's great for security and it is very safe.

The installation process is simple.

We don't have enough information about this system. When we run into problems, we'd like for it to be more clear what a valid solution might be. For example, if I try to deploy a certain technology, I have to look all over the internet to figure out how to accomplish this. There aren't enough experts in my country to be able to help troubleshoot or to post answers to problems. I'm not sure if there are enough domestic or regional experts who know enough about the solution.

The interface could be better.

I have used this solution for quite a long time. It's been more than five years.

The solution is quite stable. Its performance is good. There are no bugs or glitches. it doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable. 

I'm not sure if the product is scalable. I haven't attempted to scale it and therefore could not accurately comment on that aspect.

We have the solution in different departments and on different servers. In our department, maybe five or six people use it. 

We don't get technical support from people. If we need an answer to a problem, we need to seek it out online. 

I have found that the solution is

That said, it depends on the type of server that you are using. You need to ensure it has enough resources. The deployment is quick and we were able to do it in 30 minutes or so.  

While we have a technical team of about 15 people in our department that can handle deployment and maintenance tasks, there are other departments and other people on different teams that can as well.

I'm quite comfortable with the solution. I can handle the implementation process myself. I did not need the help of any integrators or consultants. 

The solution is free to use and free to explore. People can go ahead and discover it and experiment with it. 

I would recommend the product to other users and other companies. It's a good solution in general. 

I'd rate the solution at a seven out of ten.

What makes Ubuntu easy to use is the large set of applications and the interface. The graphical interface is user friendly.

When installing software, an online interface has to be used and commands written to run the installation. The solution could be improved if it was possible to click twice in an icon for the installation process to begin. 

In the next release, I would like to be able to use Microsoft Office within Linux. 

.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten. 

It's very helpful for development. I'm a software developer. Linux is very easy to install a couple of things from the terminal. We can do most of the things from the terminal. It's very useful, in terms of their application in the cloud server. We can install it in the server, in our community server. If I do something in my local machine in the terminal, I can do the same thing in the cloud server. That's why I'm using Linux Ubuntu.

A few years ago, maybe two years ago, we were affected by some kind of encryption virus, a malware virus. It affected most of the Windows system due to the fact that our system was connected with some LAN connection. However, the Linux-based systems were not affected as it's a different OS. In our office, we just removed the Windows thing and put everything over on the Linux OS. 

It's stable.

The solution is free to use and open-source. There is no license needed, which is actually better, even though I like Windows. 

Our cloud server's a Linux-based operating system. I need to deploy my software on our cloud server. I just use Linux on my local server. Whatever I do for my software in my local server, the same needs to happen in the cloud server. That part is easy. I can replicate that software in my cloud server. If I do it in Microsoft Windows in that local development, that is totally different from our cloud server. It will cause issues in our cloud server. That's why I am using Linux in my system.

Linux is virus-free. 

The GUI in relation to the initial setup is very simple. 

If you are in the middle of an update, and things are disrupted, it can cause issues. You need to wait for the update to complete before doing anything. 

Windows we can handle by ourselves when it comes to troubleshooting, however, Ubuntu is a bit difficult. We need some other technical person to troubleshoot things for us. It's kind of difficult to maintain as compared to Windows.

In general, Windows is easier to use and friendlier to deal with than Ubuntu.

We've been using the solution for three years. 

The solution is stable and does not get infected with viruses. It's very resilient and the performance is good. I haven't dealt with bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze.

We have about 150 people using the tool.

We do plan to increase usage in the future.

Ubuntu has some community over the internet. There is an Ask Ubuntu community online. Whenever I have some problems, I can check through the website and get some solutions. Sometimes it can take a little longer to resolve things if the question doesn't have an answer online.

I'm also familiar with Windows. In many ways it is easier to use, however, it is more prone to viruses and malware, which can be an issue.

This is an open tool. It's easy to install. From the GUI, we can just click next, next, next, and then install.

The process is very simple. It's not overly difficult.

In terms of maintenance and troubleshooting, we do require a more technical person.

I can handle the initial setup myself. I do not need the assistance of any integrators or consultants. 

The solution is open-source. It doesn't cost anything to actually use it. You just download it from their website and you can start using it. 

Currently, I'm using Ubuntu 20 LTS, 20.04 long-term support.

I'd rate the solution at a seven out of ten. I tend to prefer Windows and would recommend it over Unbuntu.

We primarily use the solution for running some applications and for various apps or software. It provides integration with operating systems.

The solution is stable.

The scalability is good.

In terms of deployment, it's a pretty quick process. 

Ubuntu's safe and fast. People have migrated from Windows to Linux due to this.

It's offered as open-source, and therefore does not cost anything to use. 

There is a strong community around it that can help with troubleshooting.

I don't have many technical insights about the product. I can't speak to what features are missing. 

For user interfaces, there are other operating systems such as Windows and Mac that are more user-friendly. Linux does not provide a user-friendly interface.

We've been using the solution for quite a while. It's been five years or so. 

The stability is good overall. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable. The performance is good.

The solution does not need to be scaled. 

We have 30 to 35 users on the solution currently.

We might increase usage in the future. However, it's hard to say, as we have many Mac users as well. They would not migrate to Linux Ubuntu.

We've never contacted technical support. It's open-source. There is a growing community around it. The tech support is only available through that community.

The initial setup is pretty straightforward. It's not too difficult or complex. 

The deployment takes about 30 or 40 minutes. It's fairly quick. 

I can handle the implementation myself. I don't need the help of integrators or consultants. 

The solution is open-source. It's free to use. We don't have to pay for it.

We're using the latest version of the solution.

I'd rate the solution at a seven out of ten.

This solution is ideal for people who want to build safer applications or if their goal is to quickly do their development. Those types of users should definitely try this system.

We use Ubuntu Linux for software development to create a desktop environment for our developers, and we also have some VMs running Ubuntu-based services. 

Ubuntu is great because you get most of the packages or software you need. You get the latest updates and stuff fairly fast. 

We don't have any support, so we search for answers online. However, it can sometimes be a little messy to find the information if you have a highly specific question or a strange problem. It would be nice if finding information were a little simpler. Maybe they could have some portal that could point you to where you can find information. I think that's more of a general issue with open-source stuff. That's how it works.

We've been using Ubuntu for three or four years.

For desktop usage, we find Ubuntu is quite stable. We seldom have a problem with it even running on laptops. I think it's one of the better Linux distributions for running on laptops, and it supports various kinds of laptop hardware. 

We don't have any paid support. We use open-source knowledge bases or forums. We're used to that, so that works fine actually. We haven't tried any professional services for support because we manage the clients ourselves.

We use different Linux distributions depending on our needs. Ubuntu is good for our desktop workstations, but Red Hat is server based, and it's more stable over time, so we use that on the server for backend stuff. It depends on where it's going to run. We use Ubuntu for workstations and Red Hat or CentOS on the server side.

Ubuntu might have some room for improvement on the server side. But then again, we haven't used it much for that use case, so I don't know. It's easier for me to say what Red Hat or CentOS are missing on the desktop side. Nothing comes to mind that Ubuntu is missing in terms of desktop deployments. 

Setting up Ubuntu is fairly simple. It's just a workstation, so that's a relatively straightforward setup. 

We have special workstations with Ubuntu preloaded because it was the best for artificial intelligence within the hardware. We got the whole system, including the hardware, software, and setup. We have support with the total package, but that's the only thing we have to pay for, and we haven't needed to use that support. In general, we don't have any license costs for Linux systems. Some of the Red Hat systems have license costs, but most are open-source or free versions.

I would rate Ubuntu eight out of 10.