CIS Hardened Image Level 1 on SUSE Linux Enterprise 15

My main use case for SUSE Linux Enterprise  involves deploying SUSE Linux Enterprise  and using it with the YaST installer to guide, set up the system, partition, and select the packages.

I also use SUSE Linux Enterprise to deliver training on SUSE Linux administration and Linux administration in general, teaching how to create users, partition the system, browse the file system, create symbolic links or hard links, and create VMs on AWS  with the SUSE flavor.

SUSE Linux Enterprise has positively impacted my organization by resulting in more contracts signed, including a recent customer from Austria working on SUSE Rancher , which means having employees skilled in SUSE Rancher  gives us the opportunity to bring this workload to our company and grow our revenue.

For my team, there are more than 10 contracts signed for SUSE products; however, I don't have much insight about the global contracts signed or a summary since I do not occupy a management position.

The best features SUSE Linux Enterprise offers include a streamlined installation process with the YaST installer, thorough documentation, and tools such as AutoYaST that enable automated, repeatable deployment; however, a new user may face a learning curve, especially if unfamiliar with SUSE-specific tools.

The need to register a system for updates and support can complicate deployment in an isolated environment. SUSE Linux Enterprise is recognized for its stability and reliability in production environments, with YaST providing a centralized interface for managing system settings, updates, and services, making routine administration straightforward.

Performance is strong out of the box, and the system is optimized for enterprise workloads; nevertheless, the official repositories prioritize stability, so some newer or less common packages may not be immediately available. Advanced configuration may still require command line expertise, and while SUSE Linux Enterprise is designed for scalability with built-in support for high availability, clustering, and seamless integration with major cloud platforms, leveraging advanced features requires careful planning and expertise, and some management tools can introduce resource overhead, particularly on smaller systems.

SUSE Linux Enterprise is a mature and reliable platform, but there are areas where it can be improved. Modernizing the system management tools is important as many users appreciate YaST for its centralized management, but there is a growing demand for more modern, web-based, and modular tools. The introduction of tools such as Agama, a web-based installer, and Cockpit in newer releases is a step in the right direction.

SUSE has made progress with multi-Linux support, allowing organizations to manage and support not just SUSE systems but also other distributions such as Red Hat and CentOS ; continuing to expand these capabilities, especially for hybrid and multi-cloud environments, will help organizations manage diverse infrastructure more effectively.

Security is a top concern, and further strengthening default security policies, simplifying compliance management, and integrating advanced vulnerability management tools would be a valuable improvement.

I have been using SUSE Linux Enterprise for more than six years.

SUSE Linux Enterprise is stable.

SUSE Linux Enterprise is widely recognized for its strong scalability, making it suitable for organizations of all sizes, from small businesses to global enterprises. It can scale horizontally or vertically, horizontally by adding more servers and vertically by increasing resources on an existing instance.

Vendor support is another strong point of SUSE Linux Enterprise, with the support team generally being responsive and knowledgeable, offering 24/7 assistance for critical issues. There is a wealth of resources available, including a comprehensive knowledge base and proactive support options.

Initial support interaction may follow a scripted process before more complex issues are escalated to specialized engineers. The quality of support can vary depending on the region.

SUSE Linux Enterprise provides a stable, secure, and well-supported platform for enterprise workloads, with powerful management tools and robust support for clustering, cloud, and containers. The main challenges include the initial learning curve for SUSE-specific tools, the need for system registration, and limited availability of the latest packages in the official repositories. Customer support is really super.

Positive

We are actually using both SUSE Linux Enterprise and Red Hat Enterprise Linux , so we didn't switch; rather, we are using both, and it's ultimately the customer who decides to choose, although we try to provide them with ideas.

Before choosing SUSE Linux Enterprise, we evaluated other options; however, in our environment, particularly production and customer production environments, we prefer enterprise versions, and for Linux, it is either SUSE or Red Hat, leaving us with limited choices for deploying Linux in an enterprise setting.

We have seen a return on investment from using SUSE Linux Enterprise, with more people engaged on projects needing SUSE skills and more revenue for the company.

I rate SUSE Linux Enterprise a 10 out of 10 because it keeps improving, with great products such as SUSE Rancher, and it stands out as the best product in the market.

I advise others looking into using SUSE Linux Enterprise to clearly define their requirements, such as workload types, scalability needs, compliance standards, and integration with existing infrastructure before committing, as SUSE Linux Enterprise excels in regulated, mission-critical, and hybrid environments. They should also invest in learning SUSE tools and take advantage of vendor support.

Public Cloud

Microsoft Azure 

My main use case for SUSE Linux Enterprise  is for installing SAP clusters, HANA , on HANA  systems, and creating LVMs and daily system admin tasks.

A specific example of how I use SUSE Linux Enterprise  for SAP clusters or HANA systems is that we have installed the cluster on newly built SAP HANA servers, tested those clusters by stopping one server, and checked if HANA is operational on the other system. After this successful testing, we handed over the system to the SAP team.

SUSE Linux Enterprise has positively impacted my organization because it is a very robust flavor of Linux we are currently using for SAP systems. Since I'm more into Azure  cloud, SAP has collaborated with Azure  to configure SAP systems mainly on SUSE Linux, resulting in better performance compared to other flavors.

In my experience, the best features SUSE Linux Enterprise offers are that while all Linux systems are similar, SUSE is more robust with a different kind of commands, and the LVM is very easy to configure, along with simple disk scanning compared to other systems.

The YaST facility on SUSE Linux, which is the GUI provided, helps in my daily work by allowing us to check logs whenever we face logging issues, and for LVM, it enables us to scan the disk and add data to the file systems easily.

SUSE Linux Enterprise can be improved by having more documentation or logging systems available on the internet, as we face difficulties troubleshooting issues without sufficient resources.

I have been using SUSE Linux Enterprise for the last two and a half years.

SUSE Linux Enterprise is stable. When HANA is utilized by many applications, I notice that while utilization does increase, we have never faced lagging or server unresponsiveness. The servers work properly, provide alerts for high CPU and memory usage, but do not encounter CPU or memory issues.

Its scalability is quite good since we are using Azure, which allows us to easily scale up or down our resources as needed.

Support for SUSE Linux Enterprise is good; we have logged several cases, and they have provided troubleshooting steps through email and calls, but real-time support when opening a case could be better.

The customer support is good; whenever we have opened a case, they have provided detailed explanations of the issues and resolutions.

Positive

We have started our SAP HANA systems on SUSE Linux only, and based on experiences from other organizations, we decided it works very effectively, so we haven't considered other flavors.

We deploy SUSE Linux Enterprise using public cloud, Azure, primarily, and all our SAP HANA systems are installed on SUSE Linux running on the public cloud, utilizing images provided by the Azure Marketplace .

For these deployments, we use Azure as our cloud provider.

I have seen a return on investment by switching our clusters from on-prem to Azure public cloud, using our same Bring Your Own Licenses, which saved costs on licensing.

My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing for SUSE Linux Enterprise is that while the licensing cost is a bit high, I believe it is justified due to the quality of service provided for SAP and heavy systems.

Before choosing SUSE Linux Enterprise, we did not evaluate other options.

I would rate SUSE Linux Enterprise an eight out of ten because SUSE works really effectively for SAP systems, and since I am mainly working on these SAP servers to provide continuous support and availability, our clients are satisfied, with no extra downtime or performance issues.

My advice for others looking into using SUSE Linux Enterprise is to not have any doubts and start working on it, as installing your applications on SUSE will stabilize them compared to other Linux flavors, where issues such as kernel, memory, or CPU hung problems can arise which you won't see on SUSE Linux servers.

I think there are too many questions; it would be helpful to receive information ahead of time about the number of questions expected, as I hadn't anticipated the interview would take 13-14 minutes during my working day.

Public Cloud

Microsoft Azure

I use it for the corporate SAP landscape.

It provides a stable and reliable OS. I recommended it based on its stability and functionality.

It has a stable and reliable OS. I recommended it based on its stability and functionality.

The functionality is good, but the licensing subscription model needs improvement. The license we subscribed to should carry over within the same instance family. Why are we required to re-subscribe when upgrading within the same family? Why are we effectively paying double fees during an upgrade?

I have been using the solution for three years.

We chose this solution because it was recommended by our managed service provider and it is known to be a good OS for SAP.

We are facing an issue with licensing usage. The subscription does not carry over within the same instance family, so upgrading an instance results in overlapping or double subscription fees.

We did not consider alternate solutions because it was highly recommended by the managed service vendor.

We are facing an issue with licensing usage. The subscription does not carry over within the same instance family, so upgrading an instance results in overlapping or double subscription fees.

I used SUSE Linux personally, not on an admin level or for advanced purposes, but for regular use. I would play around and experiment with different Linux distros, including SUSE Linux, Debian , and Fedora. I also attempted to use it for work purposes in a hospital setting, primarily to see if it could support applications like Teams and Outlook.

SUSE Linux had a clean user interface, which was a valuable feature for me. It allowed me to use the software manager differently compared to Ubuntu . Eventually, I was able to get essential applications like Teams and Outlook running on it. I primarily used it for personal desktop use, and it was solid for that.

The software management side was a bit difficult, especially compared to Ubuntu . The software manager was different, making it challenging to install certain applications. 

Additionally, I encountered issues when setting it up on newer model laptops, possibly due to hardware incompatibility, such as the solid-state drive.

I used SUSE Linux over a number of years as part of my exploration of various Linux distributions.

SUSE Linux was stable for me. I did not experience any problems with its stability.

SUSE Linux was scalable to my needs. I did not encounter any issues with scalability.

I did not reach out to customer service or tech support. I found the needed information easily on community forums and through online research.

Positive

I have used a variety of Linux distributions, including Debian , Fedora, and Ubuntu, but I did not use them specifically as a replacement for SUSE Linux.

The initial setup was straightforward. However, I encountered trouble when reclaiming space on the hard drive later on, which might have been an issue with the computer I used.

I used the open-source version, so there were no setup costs.

I evaluated other Linux distributions like Fedora and Ubuntu. Fedora's ISO is small, but I found the system itself to be annoying after a while.

I would not recommend SUSE Linux in environments where users are not tech-savvy, yet it is solid for workstations. SUSE Linux worked well on older model computers but not as effectively on newer models. 

Overall, I would rate SUSE Linux a solid nine out of ten for my purposes.

We are working with SUSE Enterprise Edition.

It is good for IT teams and business efficiency. For maintainability and all, it is good.

The most important feature is the automatic kernel lifecycle subscription, which is critical for us because the server cannot go down once we start offering any services on the cluster.

Sometimes it is a bit of work for developers to change the configurations. Some kernels will not fit with some packages, and this aspect could be improved. Furthermore, the system's rigidity when updating packages and services needs improvement. Additionally, there should be more loosely bound functionalities to improve developer experience.

We have been using SUSE Linux Enterprise  for more than five years.

SUSE Linux Enterprise  is good for IT and maintainability. However, it can be rigid, especially with kernel and package compatibility.

Some kernel versions do not fit well with certain packages, creating compatibility issues that affect scalability.

The technical support for IT and kernel-level OS issues is very good. However, it is less effective for development-level issues. The IT department handles technical support, and I cannot comment directly on its effectiveness.

Positive

We are considering alternatives for our new machine learning infrastructure and have worked with Ubuntu  in the past.

The pricing is slightly higher than expected, but it is manageable for our current project. For the upcoming projects, we are looking for cost-effective solutions.

We are considering Linux instead of SUSE and want to check some cost-effective measures, like Rocky Linux .

For developers, some flexibility and reducing dependency on specific kernel versions would be better.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.

On-premises

Other