Amazon Linux can be improved by adding more built-in features, allowing easy access to services directly when the operating system is obtained instead of requiring a manual installation.
Amazon Linux made a great change with the last version and made some features incompatible with the old version, so I did not like the new version and still prefer not to use Amazon Linux. Some options in the basic packages of Amazon Linux could contain open tools that run containers, such as using open-sourcing tools like Podman or some other easy way to deploy the main packages I use, like Docker, and some ways to easily deploy the main and common packages that all other Linux flavors already come with installed, but Amazon Linux does not come with these basic packages. I chose a six out of ten because compared to other Linux distributions, it is not a great distribution and could be better, and when I have to use Amazon Linux, the only advantage is the package management. However, when I need to fast install Docker or a new Python release, I have to waste a bit more time than using another distribution like Ubuntu.
I think Amazon Linux can be improved, particularly in that the package names for core services like MariaDB should be consistent between major versions. For example, the MariaDB server is available in Amazon Linux 2 but is absent from Amazon Linux 2023 default repositories. This lack of consistency complicates migration and breaks existing automation scripts. In discussing the needed improvements, I note that Amazon Linux 2023 is very minimal, but it is not immediately obvious that essential packages like a database server are missing from the default repositories. Better documentation or a web server package group would be helpful. While newer tools like DNF and systemctl are standard, providing more robust legacy links or clear migration guides for YUM and service check config would ease the transition for users accustomed to Amazon Linux 2.
Any technology can be improved. One minor frustration has been the lack of EPEL support, which forced us to manually compile a few niche packages that were previously easy to install. I would also like to see more streamlined documentation for migrating legacy scripts that rely on deprecated packages from older versions. Other than those transition hurdles, the performance gains have mostly outweighed the initial setup frictions.I would like more comprehensive recipes in the documentation for hardening the operating system according to specific compliance standards such as CIS or FedRAMP. On the package side, a more centralized way to request or track the addition of popular community packages would bridge the gap left by the lack of EPEL.
Amazon Linux can be improved by providing day-to-day patching updates. The security features can be improved for another application such as NGINX and Apache2.
I do not think Amazon Linux can be improved. It already has a lightweight freeware and is easily integrated with all the AWS services. I am not finding any room for improvement. Specifically on Amazon Linux, I do not think there are any needed improvements.
From a technical perspective, Amazon Linux could improve in broader availability of third-party packages, simplified system-level troubleshooting tools, and more beginner-focused system administration documentation. New users often need time to understand the permissions of Linux, networking, system services, and AWS security models together. Amazon Linux has some limitations, such as a smaller package ecosystem compared to Ubuntu. It requires deep Linux knowledge for troubleshooting. The AWS-centric design makes it less portable outside AWS.
Technical Lead at a outsourcing company with 10,001+ employees
Real User
Top 10
Jan 23, 2026
Amazon Linux can be improved by integrating other cloud features so that other cloud providers can also use Amazon Linux. GCP and Azure could benefit from Amazon Linux compatibility as well.
Amazon Linux can be improved with better integrations in applications. There are other improvements I think Amazon Linux needs, but it is mostly working well for me.
Amazon Linux could be improved by including libraries for supervisor. On Ubuntu, supervisor runs Django services in the background, while Amazon Linux does not have this built-in and requires a different supervisor approach. Documentation or PDF files about well-known solutions for this would be beneficial. Since Amazon Linux is based on Ubuntu, documentation explaining the differences between Ubuntu and Amazon Linux would be valuable. When I am accustomed to working with Ubuntu and want to use the same functions on Amazon Linux, I would prefer to understand the differences and how to implement features that exist on Ubuntu so I do not become lost in the process or have to search extensively for information.
In terms of improvements, the one thing I would say which I wish Amazon Linux was better at is that sometimes I find that I need to compile my own software because some dependencies are not within Amazon Linux. It is very lightweight, which is beneficial in some regards, but in other regards, if I have to use other tools with it, maybe different network drivers, I would have to compile that myself. If there were different versions of Amazon Linux based on how heavyweight or lightweight you want it to be, that could be quite good and would allow more flexibility and choice. I would say the only other limitation, which is to be expected, is that Amazon Linux would lock you into using Amazon if you were to use that distribution, because it would be very difficult to port it on GCP, for example. You probably would not want to do that anyway, so you are locking yourself in, but you would have to accept that if you were to actually use this, which maybe you do not have an issue with, but maybe you would. Because the package ecosystem of Amazon Linux is lighter than some more popular distributions like Ubuntu or Debian, there may be fewer third-party community packages which other users might want to use, but they might find that they are not able to. In my specific use case, I do not have to use too many third-party packages, so it is not much of a problem, but I would imagine that other users might see that as an issue.
Senior Software Engineer at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
Real User
Top 20
Jan 13, 2026
Things are working fine overall; there is not anything I could advise as an improvement for Amazon Linux. If we had to do customization for RStudio, that would be good. Many data science users from other companies might be using RStudio and R, so if there were an AMI out there that had all these packages and products installed by default, that would be beneficial. However, I am not sure how that would work since we pay for RStudio licensing, and I do not know if that could come by default in Amazon Linux. I choose nine out of ten because it could use a bit more options. For example, an Amazon Linux Docker image that is pre-built with Jupyter Notebook or RStudio would mean less work for us as customers, enabling us to download and get it installed and running as soon as possible.
Software Engineer at a tech services company with 501-1,000 employees
Real User
Top 5
Nov 28, 2025
I have not had exposure to migrations, such as from Azure to AWS or GCP to AWS. A main concern is that security patches and versions are released continuously. For example, EKS versions increase with updates. Our applications are built on the latest versions, which affects upgrades. We need to make modifications at the system and application coding level, and some packages may become outdated. This is impacted by the need to maintain security, which is the standard they want to uphold. Amazon stops support for older versions of EKS and other services. While they do provide some time for migration, they should provide at least basic support so that if a product does not need to migrate to new versions, that would be a better approach.
One improvement for Amazon Linux would be stronger support for running it outside AWS. Although Amazon provides local VM images for VirtualBox and VMware, they are intended mainly for development and testing. Unlike Ubuntu, Debian, or Red Hat, Amazon Linux is not designed or fully supported as a production OS in on-prem or hybrid environments. Expanding official support outside AWS would offer more flexibility for teams that maintain mixed infrastructure. Another area for improvement is the community ecosystem. Compared to Ubuntu or Red Hat, Amazon Linux has a smaller community and fewer third-party resources or tutorials. A larger ecosystem would make troubleshooting and adoption easier. Finally, improving backward compatibility between Amazon Linux 2 and Amazon Linux 2023—especially around package management (DNF vs yum) and updated toolchains—would simplify upgrades for teams managing large fleets.
Senior Engineer - Cloud and datacenter at a media company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Real User
Top 10
Jun 27, 2025
In my opinion, for improvement, Amazon Linux could make better integration with third-party vendors, perhaps enhance user experience or lower the price compared to other Linux solutions. For the future, it would be great to see Amazon Linux have more wide functionality to work with other systems.
I have been experimenting with new terminals, and I think that the default terminals for Linux machines in general could be improved. For example, Alacritty. I have been using these things extensively now, so they could do a good job improving their terminals.
Amazon Linux is a secure and stable distribution for cloud environments, optimized for AWS performance. It is widely adopted by developers seeking minimal disruption in deployment and management, offering a seamless operational experience.Developed by Amazon Web Services, Amazon Linux provides an environment streamlined for performance on AWS infrastructure. By offering long-term support and regular security updates, it ensures crucial security and reliability. It is tailored to enhance...
Amazon Linux can be improved by adding more built-in features, allowing easy access to services directly when the operating system is obtained instead of requiring a manual installation.
Amazon Linux made a great change with the last version and made some features incompatible with the old version, so I did not like the new version and still prefer not to use Amazon Linux. Some options in the basic packages of Amazon Linux could contain open tools that run containers, such as using open-sourcing tools like Podman or some other easy way to deploy the main packages I use, like Docker, and some ways to easily deploy the main and common packages that all other Linux flavors already come with installed, but Amazon Linux does not come with these basic packages. I chose a six out of ten because compared to other Linux distributions, it is not a great distribution and could be better, and when I have to use Amazon Linux, the only advantage is the package management. However, when I need to fast install Docker or a new Python release, I have to waste a bit more time than using another distribution like Ubuntu.
I think Amazon Linux can be improved, particularly in that the package names for core services like MariaDB should be consistent between major versions. For example, the MariaDB server is available in Amazon Linux 2 but is absent from Amazon Linux 2023 default repositories. This lack of consistency complicates migration and breaks existing automation scripts. In discussing the needed improvements, I note that Amazon Linux 2023 is very minimal, but it is not immediately obvious that essential packages like a database server are missing from the default repositories. Better documentation or a web server package group would be helpful. While newer tools like DNF and systemctl are standard, providing more robust legacy links or clear migration guides for YUM and service check config would ease the transition for users accustomed to Amazon Linux 2.
I believe there is no need to improve Amazon Linux. It is definitely working in a very progressive and highly scalable way.
Any technology can be improved. One minor frustration has been the lack of EPEL support, which forced us to manually compile a few niche packages that were previously easy to install. I would also like to see more streamlined documentation for migrating legacy scripts that rely on deprecated packages from older versions. Other than those transition hurdles, the performance gains have mostly outweighed the initial setup frictions.I would like more comprehensive recipes in the documentation for hardening the operating system according to specific compliance standards such as CIS or FedRAMP. On the package side, a more centralized way to request or track the addition of popular community packages would bridge the gap left by the lack of EPEL.
Amazon Linux can be improved by providing day-to-day patching updates. The security features can be improved for another application such as NGINX and Apache2.
I do not think Amazon Linux can be improved. It already has a lightweight freeware and is easily integrated with all the AWS services. I am not finding any room for improvement. Specifically on Amazon Linux, I do not think there are any needed improvements.
Amazon Linux can be improved by providing security updates more frequently.
From a technical perspective, Amazon Linux could improve in broader availability of third-party packages, simplified system-level troubleshooting tools, and more beginner-focused system administration documentation. New users often need time to understand the permissions of Linux, networking, system services, and AWS security models together. Amazon Linux has some limitations, such as a smaller package ecosystem compared to Ubuntu. It requires deep Linux knowledge for troubleshooting. The AWS-centric design makes it less portable outside AWS.
Amazon Linux can be improved by integrating other cloud features so that other cloud providers can also use Amazon Linux. GCP and Azure could benefit from Amazon Linux compatibility as well.
Amazon Linux can be improved with better integrations in applications. There are other improvements I think Amazon Linux needs, but it is mostly working well for me.
Amazon Linux could be improved by including libraries for supervisor. On Ubuntu, supervisor runs Django services in the background, while Amazon Linux does not have this built-in and requires a different supervisor approach. Documentation or PDF files about well-known solutions for this would be beneficial. Since Amazon Linux is based on Ubuntu, documentation explaining the differences between Ubuntu and Amazon Linux would be valuable. When I am accustomed to working with Ubuntu and want to use the same functions on Amazon Linux, I would prefer to understand the differences and how to implement features that exist on Ubuntu so I do not become lost in the process or have to search extensively for information.
In terms of improvements, the one thing I would say which I wish Amazon Linux was better at is that sometimes I find that I need to compile my own software because some dependencies are not within Amazon Linux. It is very lightweight, which is beneficial in some regards, but in other regards, if I have to use other tools with it, maybe different network drivers, I would have to compile that myself. If there were different versions of Amazon Linux based on how heavyweight or lightweight you want it to be, that could be quite good and would allow more flexibility and choice. I would say the only other limitation, which is to be expected, is that Amazon Linux would lock you into using Amazon if you were to use that distribution, because it would be very difficult to port it on GCP, for example. You probably would not want to do that anyway, so you are locking yourself in, but you would have to accept that if you were to actually use this, which maybe you do not have an issue with, but maybe you would. Because the package ecosystem of Amazon Linux is lighter than some more popular distributions like Ubuntu or Debian, there may be fewer third-party community packages which other users might want to use, but they might find that they are not able to. In my specific use case, I do not have to use too many third-party packages, so it is not much of a problem, but I would imagine that other users might see that as an issue.
Things are working fine overall; there is not anything I could advise as an improvement for Amazon Linux. If we had to do customization for RStudio, that would be good. Many data science users from other companies might be using RStudio and R, so if there were an AMI out there that had all these packages and products installed by default, that would be beneficial. However, I am not sure how that would work since we pay for RStudio licensing, and I do not know if that could come by default in Amazon Linux. I choose nine out of ten because it could use a bit more options. For example, an Amazon Linux Docker image that is pre-built with Jupyter Notebook or RStudio would mean less work for us as customers, enabling us to download and get it installed and running as soon as possible.
Right now, I don't think there are any specific areas to improve in Amazon Linux.
I have not had exposure to migrations, such as from Azure to AWS or GCP to AWS. A main concern is that security patches and versions are released continuously. For example, EKS versions increase with updates. Our applications are built on the latest versions, which affects upgrades. We need to make modifications at the system and application coding level, and some packages may become outdated. This is impacted by the need to maintain security, which is the standard they want to uphold. Amazon stops support for older versions of EKS and other services. While they do provide some time for migration, they should provide at least basic support so that if a product does not need to migrate to new versions, that would be a better approach.
One improvement for Amazon Linux would be stronger support for running it outside AWS. Although Amazon provides local VM images for VirtualBox and VMware, they are intended mainly for development and testing. Unlike Ubuntu, Debian, or Red Hat, Amazon Linux is not designed or fully supported as a production OS in on-prem or hybrid environments. Expanding official support outside AWS would offer more flexibility for teams that maintain mixed infrastructure. Another area for improvement is the community ecosystem. Compared to Ubuntu or Red Hat, Amazon Linux has a smaller community and fewer third-party resources or tutorials. A larger ecosystem would make troubleshooting and adoption easier. Finally, improving backward compatibility between Amazon Linux 2 and Amazon Linux 2023—especially around package management (DNF vs yum) and updated toolchains—would simplify upgrades for teams managing large fleets.
Amazon Linux could be improved by including additional features and continuous improvements in various areas.
In my opinion, for improvement, Amazon Linux could make better integration with third-party vendors, perhaps enhance user experience or lower the price compared to other Linux solutions. For the future, it would be great to see Amazon Linux have more wide functionality to work with other systems.
I have been experimenting with new terminals, and I think that the default terminals for Linux machines in general could be improved. For example, Alacritty. I have been using these things extensively now, so they could do a good job improving their terminals.