I'm currently running the solution at home to teach myself all of the flavors of Linux. If a new one comes out that I don't know or haven't worked on, I'll install it and see how easy it is to configure and set up. I evaluate it for users who don't have very strong computers and want to move away from Microsoft because they don't want to upgrade.

I evaluate Linux as a recommendation so that users can get away from Windows because Windows is so memory-intensive. For people who have an older machine and can't necessarily run Windows 10 or Windows 11, I usually recommend a Linux flavor based on the hardware they're running.

The UX design, the user front end, and the user GUI are very well done on the GNOME and KDE platform side. It's very simple to work with, easy to learn, and know where things are. I have worked with a lot of different solutions like Debian, Ubuntu, Red Hat, and CentOS.

Rocky Linux is very easy, and if you switch from one to the other, you can easily detect your tools in the front end. Since it is very similar to the file system breakdown of downloads and documents, it's very easy to show users where things will be.

The solution's audio integration for virtual machines could be improved. It took me almost a day to get my audio drivers to work while running it as a virtual machine. I run Oracle Virtual Box. Within Oracle Virtual Box, I would really like it if they looked at the audio integration or the audio driver specifically for virtual machines.

I have been using Rocky Linux for five years.

Rocky Linux runs very well for me on low-resource systems, which only have four gigs of memory and one CPU. Rocky Linux is not very resource-intensive.

I rate the solution ten out of ten for stability.

If I put it on a low-spec machine, the solution's deployment will take a maximum of one hour, which is a reasonable amount of time. Comparatively, Windows takes much longer to deploy.

Rocky Linux is a cheap solution. Compared to the market prices of other tools, the solution has a very competitive pricing. The solution comes at such a price that I can recommend it to users who do not want to spend money. I spend no more than $10 per year for Rocky Linux.

For a Windows migration, I'll do a full backup to external, set up Rocky Linux, and bring it in. Then, I'll just import all the relevant files. Most solutions like Rocky Linux and Ubuntu have a downloads folder or documents folder. I try to recreate the user experience from a UX perspective to be the same.

One of the other Linux tools I'm currently evaluating is Zorin. Zorin looks almost identical to Windows. When you log in, the interface and everything looks very similar to Windows 11. CentOS, Rocky, and Zorin are three solutions that I recommend for users who want to move away from Microsoft but keep the same experience. I can make it look and feel the same way it looks and feels on Windows.

So, migrating a user from Windows is easy because as long as it looks the same, they don't really care what happens in the backend. They don't really care what happens when they click on a button. They just want to see what they saw when they worked on Windows.

I set Rocky Linux up to update once a week with the package management. It does its own updates, and as long as there's internet, there are no problems.

The transition to Rocky Linux wasn't as difficult as I had expected, but it wasn't as easy as I had expected because Rocky Linux is one of the lesser-known versions of Linux. When I had trouble with my audio drivers, very little information was available on resolving the issue. That was a little difficult, but it was purely because Rocky Linux is not as well known as Ubuntu, CentOS, or the bigger versions of Linux.

From that perspective, I struggled a bit. Otherwise, it was quite smooth. The only problem I had was on the audio side.

The solution's deployment time was very much dependent on the hardware that I was running it on. Depending on the hardware, it's quite simple because it has the same features as all the new Linux. I can also configure and run a little LVM installation.

I like the fact that, in a lot of ways, it's still the same as the old Linux and all the other Linux you know. It looks very similar, but it adds little tweaks, and it still looks like Rocky Linux when you're inside it.

Overall, I rate the solution ten out of ten.

We tested Rocky Linux as a replacement for CentOS. It was a drop-in replacement that worked as advertised out of the box. However, we decided to go with another solution. We felt Alma Linux was a better fit for us than Rocky Linux. 

We decided not to use Rocky Linux, and therefore, it has had no impact on our organization. 

Rocky Linux does function as a drop-in replacement for CentOS, which is a valuable feature, but we felt there were better options out there. 

In terms of improvement, Rocky Linux needs to clarify its identity and target audience. While it is technically sound as a CentOS replacement, there is a disconnect in its marketing messaging, which initially positioned it as an HPC platform. It should define its core identity and audience more clearly.

We tested Rocky Linux for a window of about three months. 

I haven't needed to use customer service or support, which speaks volumes about their product's reliability and ease of use.

It is a straightforward setup, serving as a direct replacement for Red Hat Enterprise Linux or CentOS. Rocky Linux requires standard maintenance similar to any other Linux distribution, without any unusually heavy demands.

Overall, I would rate Rocky Linux as a seven out of ten.

We work with a diverse set of tools and systems. We often need to experiment with various products and utilize standard development tools like compilers and debuggers to streamline our workflow.

We make extensive use of Rocky Linux for system configuration. It helps us keep our workstations in sync and ensures consistent settings across most of our machines.

We have a lot of PostgreSQL databases in our development work within our organization. Many of the tools and packages we need for this are readily available and easy to install and configure. The flexibility and availability of software packages make our workflow faster and more adaptable. It provides extensive community support and makes seeking recommendations, assistance, and access to software and settings easy. This supportive community aspect significantly simplifies our work in various environments, and it's something we greatly appreciate as developers.

Rocky Linux, being relatively new, initially lacked some of the software we were accustomed to from CentOS 7. There were some missing components and changes that required adjustment which is typical when transitioning between major releases in any distribution. Since it offers open-source documentation, there may be minor challenges in finding information. One of the potential issues is that if you don't pay for support, you may need to manage certain aspects on your own and rely on the community for assistance.

The operating system has proven to be stable and reliable in our experience.

We haven't encountered any major problems with the operating system itself. Our primary challenges typically revolve around software-related issues, especially when it comes to third-party software or our in-house applications.

Our decision to use CentOS, and now its successor, Rocky Linux, was rooted in the desire to stay close to the Red Hat ecosystem. We have continued this approach by selecting distributions that are as similar as possible to RHEL. The aim is to ensure that our development and testing process aligns with the standards of the industry and our customer base. We want to maintain a consistent and reliable development environment, which is why we choose distributions like Rocky Linux or AlmaLinux.

The implementation process is relatively straightforward. We typically start by cloning the repository, which contains various configurations and packages. Since we have a considerable number of workstations, specifically around eighty, we find this cloning approach to be efficient. Once the repository is cloned, the system can be set up to automatically perform updates and package installations.

When we need to set up a new workstation, we utilize a kickstart configuration which contains essential information about the workstation, such as its IP address and other specifications. After a new workstation is added, the kickstart process efficiently sets up the machine according to the specified parameters. The key is having a well-organized system for repository access and automation, which ensures a smooth and efficient workflow when working with Rocky Linux.

When evaluating a replacement for CentOS 7, we initially had to consider certain specialized requirements before making a decision. Regarding the choice between AlmaLinux and Rocky Linux, both options were strong contenders due to their close alignment with the CentOS path, which we were transitioning from. We conducted testing and analysis on both AlmaLinux and Rocky Linux. Initially, it was challenging to determine which one to choose, but we opted for the distribution that appeared to have a more significant user base and community support. This decision is often crucial, especially in open-source environments, as a larger user community can provide valuable assistance with development, information sharing, and problem-solving.

There is a wealth of valuable information available online when it comes to using Rocky Linux. It provides clear guidance on the initial setup steps to get your system up and running for experimentation. Once the system is up and running, you'll notice that, as a user, the experience is quite similar to using other Linux distributions like CentOS or RHEL. The primary differences tend to surface when it comes to system management and administration, where you may notice distinctions between Rocky Linux and other distributions. However, with the available resources and documentation, navigating these differences becomes manageable. I would rate it eight out of ten.