My main use case for Rocky Linux is the user-friendly commands and being able to work much easier on the RHEL supported flavor as compared to other flavors whereby you have to ask for escalation when you want to install something or change file permissions or anything of that sort.

A specific example of how Rocky Linux has made things easier for me is that it has streamlined processes by not requiring privilege escalation all the time. Once I'm logged in as root, I don't have to escalate using sudo, which makes things much easier, especially since it's not a security risk when proper restrictions are set up in the perimeter with SSH and firewall rules and jump host, making it much smoother.

The best features Rocky Linux offers include not having to escalate privileges all the time, and it is binary compatible with RHEL systems, which means long-term support, making it much more predictable when it comes to updates. It also has a strong focus on enterprise workloads.

Binary compatibility and long-term support features have made things simpler because you can easily integrate the two systems with your Red Hat kernel. The long-term predictable updates make it a clear choice because I know that whatever I'm implementing now is guaranteed to receive updates in the long term.

Rocky Linux has positively impacted my organization by making things simpler, especially with not having to escalate privileges all the time using sudo as compared to Ubuntu flavors.

I've experienced less downtime in terms of having to focus on updates, which improves the security posture. Rocky Linux is compatible with automation tools, including Ansible, whereby we can deploy the infrastructure using code. It easily integrates with other containers and automation tools, making it easier to push updates, particularly security updates, and upgrade packages.

At the moment, I don't see much improvement that can be made to Rocky Linux. We work in IT and security is the main factor that we focus on, so perhaps more security control rules could be implemented. However, so far, I don't see much room for improvement.

I have been using Rocky Linux for three to four years.

Rocky Linux is stable.

In terms of scalability, you need to have automation tools.

The customer support for Rocky Linux is good, as it offers long-term support.

I haven't necessarily switched. I used Ubuntu before, and we still use Ubuntu even in this current company along with Rocky Linux.

It is not difficult to deploy Rocky Linux in my organization which is set up on a private cloud.

I never worked on the implementation or pricing part, but I know that Rocky Linux is free, and I can download it and deploy it in whatever environment I have, whether it be H3C, VMware, or Hyper-V. I am not involved in costs.

Regarding return on investment in terms of time saved with automation, I wouldn't know about money saved as I am not in the finance department.

I never worked on the pricing part, but I know that Rocky Linux is free, and I can download it and deploy it in whatever environment I have, whether it be H3C, VMware, or Hyper-V. I am not involved in costs.

Before choosing Rocky Linux, I didn't evaluate other options.

My advice to others looking into using Rocky Linux is they should go for it. There isn't much difference compared to other flavors, and it is much closer to RHEL systems, so whatever commands you would use in your Red Hat, you would use in Rocky Linux. I rate Rocky Linux 8 out of 10.

For the last two years, I have been using Rocky Linux for our project. I do all the things: installations of Rocky Linux, coding in Rocky Linux, and using Rocky Linux as a platform.

We use Rocky Linux as a base OS for our project, and on top of Rocky Linux OS, we are building our project. We have chosen Rocky Linux because it supports long-term support.

We are using Rocky Linux for one of our projects in CommScope, using it as a base OS, and on top of that, we are installing many RPMs and making it customized. We are adding numerous security patches, as Rocky Linux continuously provides security updates and patches, which is one of the best benefits we are getting. We are also using Rocky Linux for high availability purposes, with approximately 11 to 12 server clusters.

We are using Rocky Linux because it has strong security, compatibility with RHEL, and enterprise-grade stability, which is the main reason for choosing Rocky Linux. The plus point is that they regularly provide security updates and patches, which is very helpful to us.

Rocky Linux offers strong security and enterprise-grade stability as its best features. These are the two main advantages compared to others.

Enterprise-grade stability refers to the fact that it uses the RHEL source code, ensuring compatibility, and is suitable for servers, production environments, and critical applications, built to be a reliable, long-term support OS.

In terms of security, we are getting regular security patches and updates, which is one of the best use cases I've noticed positively impacting Rocky Linux in my organization.

Day by day, the vulnerabilities are decreasing, and as we have implemented good practices, there is less downtime.

Currently, I have nothing to say about how Rocky Linux can be improved.

The rolling update for Rocky Linux is very limited and focused on stability, so the software may not always be the latest version, which is something they need to improve.

I have been working in my current field for the last two years and eight months.

Rocky Linux is stable.

Regarding scalability, Rocky Linux is a very good OS, and we haven't faced any issues currently.

Currently, the customer support for Rocky Linux is not fully developed and is in a growing stage; the customer support is also not very responsive.

Previously, we were using CentOS, which reached its end of life, prompting us to switch to Rocky Linux because we found it is an LTS with stability and long-term support.

The pricing for Rocky Linux has no major difference compared to enterprise-level software, which is similar to enterprise-level Linux, so there isn't much difference and it's a good experience with both the older and newer versions compared to CentOS and Rocky Linux.

We checked some enterprise-level OSs such as Debian before choosing Rocky Linux, but we found we were more inclined toward Rocky Linux as it gives LTS support and stability, so we moved to Rocky Linux.

If you are looking for a long-term support OS, an LTS, then I recommend choosing Rocky Linux, as they are releasing many patches and updates regarding security.

Rocky Linux is best for someone who wants good scalability, enterprise-grade stability, substantial community engagement, compatibility with RHEL, and strong security. I also feel there is good documentation with Rocky Linux, along with providing long-term support, which makes it better to choose Rocky Linux.

On a scale of one to ten, I rate Rocky Linux a nine out of ten.

My main use case for Rocky Linux is to use it as an enterprise server OS, providing a production-grade server platform equivalent to RHEL, running critical workloads, ERM, CRM, database servers like PostgreSQL and MySQL, and supporting broadcast and media workflows, where it serves as a stable OS for encoding, transcoding, and streaming platforms like Haivision and other OEM encoders, ensuring predictable performance for low-latency live streaming and content packaging workflows.

My use case with Rocky Linux also includes web and application hosting, cloud and virtualization, media and streaming workflows, serving as a stable foundation for live encoders, packagers, and CDN nodes; we use it with platforms such as Titan Live, Near-live, Haivision, and Wowza for OTT delivery, high-performance computing, and security-sensitive workloads.

The best features Rocky Linux offers include being 100% bug compatible compared to RHEL, providing enterprise stability for production workloads, meeting the need for reliability and long-term support, and being managed by the Rocky Enterprise Software Foundation, with its security and compliance features and migration tools making a significant difference for us.

Rocky Linux performs excellently in low-latency live streaming and content packaging workflows, as we use it for optimizing compatibility with the streaming platforms, utilizing an optimized kernel for networking, tuning profiles, IRQ affinity, security, reliability, and hardware and driver support.

Rocky Linux has positively impacted our organization; it works reliably and enhances our low-latency streaming workflows for our affiliates, performing well without noticeable glitches in our workflow. Since we started using Rocky Linux, we have drastically reduced low latency, especially across the public network, and we haven't seen much downtime, significantly decreasing downtime for the servers accommodating low live streaming workflows.

Rocky Linux could be improved with API-based tools that would help our streaming environment be monitored using DataMiner. Having REST API or SNMP-based protocols would be beneficial, as we want to integrate Rocky Linux for monitoring with our DataMiner platform.

I have been using Rocky Linux for three years.

We haven't tried to scale Rocky Linux since we recently started using this solution, but in the future, we definitely plan to scale as per our needs.

Rocky Linux is up to the mark; the solutions are really customer-focused and revenue-oriented, and the support level is extraordinary, providing on-time assistance, making it commendable.

The migration tools have been incredibly helpful; we use migrate2rocky.sh, a primary tool developed by the Rocky Foundation, which automates the conversion process of a compatible system to Rocky Linux, and applies it for log correlation and diagnosis of issues we encounter in our live streaming workflows.

Rocky Linux has a long-term life cycle for 10 years, being minimal and customizable, with performance tuning tools and an enterprise hardware ecosystem that stand out for our team.

My advice for others looking into using Rocky Linux is that if any organization is in search of a robust, stable, scalable solution in the broadcast media tech sector, they should definitely assess it, as they will likely achieve the desired results.

Currently, we are just a broadcaster and not a partner or reseller for Rocky products; however, in the future, we will explore a partnership for a B2B relationship.

We are currently satisfied with Rocky Linux, but if we encounter issues in the future, we will definitely highlight them.

I rate Rocky Linux 9 out of 10.

Our main use case for Rocky Linux is to host servers and developer environments for leading telecom vendors.

The best features Rocky Linux offers, in my experience, include long-term support, stability, and one-to-one binary compatibility with Red Hat Enterprise Linux.

Rocky Linux has been a major driver for our cloud migration strategy and has proven to be one of the most cost-effective solutions for us, allowing us to save huge revenue while maintaining fantastic consistency with updates.

From a feature or experience perspective, it has been fantastic, but the only drawback we have seen is that even though there are timely deliveries of security patches and vulnerability fixes, the Rocky Linux Security Advisor or RLSA updates via the DNF utilities are broken or delayed. When we use the DNF functionality to search the affected RLSA or RLSA with CVE IDs, it's not working as expected, and the mirrors or the XML files need to be updated similar to Red Hat, which would help us keep our environment more secure and make maintenance easier. Otherwise, we have to do extensive research to identify the affected packages or RPMs with specific RLSA numbers.

I would like to see improvements in the security areas and updates of RLSA details as soon as the RLSA numbers are updated in the XML file. Security has been a major driver for IT organizations across the world and must be addressed at a faster pace. The unavailability of RLSA in the DNF search has been a major drawback that I would like to see improved in the future.

I have been using Rocky Linux for three years for our day-to-day use cases.

We have seen a stable Rocky Linux environment as of now.

Our solution does not currently involve architecture with scalability.

Customer support for Rocky Linux is excellent, and the documentation is also very good.

We were using CentOS previously, and as the lifecycle of CentOS was changed by Red Hat, we looked for an alternative, and Rocky Linux suited us best.

It has been a wonderful experience associating with Rocky Linux, and we would continue to use it full-fledged. I don't see that we have to choose any alternative OS in the near future.

ROI has been good as we have significant open source community involvement. In fact, we have increased our footprints, allowing us to onboard more resources or employees, which is a positive sign.

My experience with pricing, setup costs, and licensing for Rocky Linux is good and streamlined, with no hiccups.

Before choosing Rocky Linux, we evaluated other options including Ubuntu, Oracle Linux, and a few other flavors, but since Rocky Linux has one-to-one binary compatibility with Red Hat, it was the best fit.

Rocky Linux has been a ready-to-use solution for us, so we don't need to have vendor dependency or vendor lock for any support or help. The community has been a great help in resolving all issues, and while from a monetary point of view, it has resulted in significant savings, we cannot provide the exact numbers as some of this is company confidential.

There is not much need for further improvements at this juncture.

If you want to get a premium product with the best in-house community support, Rocky Linux would be the one solution.

On a scale of 1-10, I rate Rocky Linux a 9 out of 10.

My main use case for Rocky Linux is that all the applications used by our company are hosted in Rocky Linux servers, so we will be maintaining, remediating the vulnerabilities which are getting reported on the servers, patching the servers and making them up to date, and helping all the users who log into servers to use their applications without any issues.

A specific example of an application where I'm using Rocky Linux in my company is the POS machines which are used by the customers, where all the POS related applications are hosted in Rocky Linux operating system, so that's where Rocky Linux came into the picture, and from the OS level, we will be giving all the support wherever it is necessary.

The middleware packages such as Apache Tomcat, Java, HTTPD are all running on these Rocky Linux servers, so we ensure all those services are up and running without any issues.

The best features Rocky Linux offers are that it is much easier to use. Since it is open source, whatever issues we face, we can get answers from the community for each and every issue we encounter, so finding a solution for each problem is much easier, and that's the major feature I feel for Rocky Linux.

When comparing Rocky Linux to Red Hat, it is more stable, as whatever issues arise, we can solve them quickly, and since there is an open community, we receive help from everybody who is using this.

Rocky Linux has helped our organization significantly in terms of cost. If we were purchasing a Red Hat subscription, it would cost significantly more, but since Rocky Linux is open source and free, it has helped with cost reduction, allowing us to utilize those funds for other needed things.

When we moved from Red Hat to Rocky Linux, we saved around 70% of the cost which was used for subscriptions. That money is now used for other things such as middleware applications and monitoring applications including DataDog and Dynatrace.

To improve Rocky Linux, providing releases for each package, firmware, and kernel more quickly would be beneficial. Currently, it takes more than one month to release a new package or kernel, so speeding that up would help reduce reported vulnerability remediations.

Documenting the frequently asked questions and related issues in a PDF or Word document would be helpful so that everybody can refer to them, eliminating the need to post a question and wait for a reply, thus reducing time delay.

Currently, there aren't many needed improvements, only the support aspect needs a little improvement. Everything else is going well and smoothly.

I have been using Rocky Linux for more than six years.

Rocky Linux is stable, scalable, and it is very much easier to use.

Regarding customer support, since it is open source, most of the solutions are available on the community page, but even if we raise a support ticket, we receive a resolution or a reply from the team within two business days.

I would rate the customer support a seven.

Before choosing Rocky Linux, we were considering moving with Red Hat itself, planning to move from RHEL 8 to RHEL 9, but after considering the cost involving Red Hat, we thought about an open source solution, which led us to Rocky Linux.

When it comes to return on investment, a lot of money is saved since we moved from a purchased license to the open source provided by Rocky Linux. Time is also saved since whenever an issue arises, we get resolutions from the community without needing to raise a ticket with the support team.

When we encounter an issue, we look all over the internet, not only depending on the community, so whichever solutions provide us with proper resolution are considered.

My advice to others looking into using Rocky Linux is that it is much easier to use, it's scalable, performance is good, and there is no cost involved in using it.

I rate Rocky Linux nine out of ten.

We use Rocky Linux as a big data platform, with a Solar, Apache setup having many nodes, in production just eight and two in test. We have an application server with Tomcat and TomEE, and we use it for the application server for this big database, Quadrant, Docker, and we have CUDA installed with Docker, using PySpark, Torsion, TensorFlow, and many other things. We use Rocky Linux for all, and I have installed Ansible and Prometheus to monitor all servers in production.

We have a normal three-tier architecture and new things on Docker with PySpark, using it for enrichment and loading a million records of data in our database. We have a Spark node with Apache Spark; it's part of our big data, similar to Hadoop big data.

The best features Rocky Linux offers include clustering and all the packages from Red Hat.

Rocky Linux has impacted my organization very positively because we migrated everything from CentOS and Windows servers to Rocky Linux. Everything is clear, with good packaging, and now it's version 9.6, which is very important for us due to security problems since we are in Europe. Rocky Linux is very good for security and other aspects.

Since migrating to Rocky Linux, I've seen specific outcomes such as improved security because CentOS stopped the project, and security patches aren't being released. We need to maintain a system similar to Red Hat, which is very stable and has many features such as file system, topology, and containers.

Rocky Linux could be improved by having more integration with Kubernetes.

I started using Rocky Linux two years ago because we migrated many servers from the CentOS distribution, and now we have all servers migrated by me in Rocky Linux.

When I started to migrate, we had Ubuntu as another choice to move from CentOS, but Ubuntu is a little different, and the best way is to maintain Rocky Linux. We used Rocky Linux, and now we are very happy with it; it's a very good choice, and I think it's very powerful, making it an excellent option with 17 VMs using VMware and many instances.

I give Rocky Linux a nine out of 10 because ten represents perfection, perhaps similar to a real-time operating system such as those used in airplane computers.

My advice for others looking into using Rocky Linux is to choose it, especially for people coming from CentOS; I suggest Rocky Linux as the best option, not any other distribution.

My company has a business relationship with this vendor as a partner.

You can use my real name when publishing my review. You can use Joint Research Center, JRC, but not my real company name in the review as I'm working for another company.

As a Cloud Ops Engineer, we are setting up the server on the EC2 machine with Rocky Linux, while also doing some setup related to the frameworks for Ruby. We are installing their dependencies related to the Ruby on Rails application and other security-level software such as Rapid7, CrowdStrike, and many more.

On Rocky Linux, we have deployed a Ruby on Rails application, and we have set up other applications as well.

We are not doing this stuff manually, as we have set up an Ansible automation script to set up all this stuff on Rocky Linux, and for the installation and server setup, we are using Terraform. Using Terraform, we are spinning up the instance on AWS EC2.

I purchased Rocky Linux through the AWS Marketplace.

Rocky Linux provides us with extended maintenance, security patches, and support lifecycle aligned with RHEL, making it highly reliable for critical systems. For production deployment, Rocky Linux is a great choice because it offers full RHEL compatibility without licensing costs, along with strong community support.

If we are planning to migrate from CentOS, it was very smooth and straightforward, and we can follow their official document to migrate from CentOS to Rocky Linux. Rocky Linux 8 is supported until 2029, and Rocky Linux 9 is supported until 2032, which is a significant benefit.

Previously it was CentOS, which is already EOL, and now we have the latest packages and an up-to-date operating system, so we get the most benefit at the security level. Also, performance-wise, we are seeing improvement in the application and day-to-day operations.

I have no suggestions regarding how Rocky Linux can be improved. I haven't identified any areas that need improvement yet.

I have been using Rocky Linux for over a year.

Rocky Linux is stable in my experience.

Rocky Linux's scalability is very easy. Even if the server is not responding and we want to attach the volume on another instance or a temporary instance, it is very easy and straightforward with no hiccups.

I have not reached out to customer support for Rocky Linux. This has not yet been discussed with my security team, as this is recent, and the security team started checking on this.

We switched to Rocky Linux because our previous OS was EOL, and we had to switch to the new OS, so we chose Rocky Linux.

Regarding return on investment, we have chosen the same exact resource that we were using earlier, so there is no immediate return on investment. That needs to be identified if we can cut down our resources with a smaller instance, but that has not yet been figured out.

I notice money saved as a return on investment.

There is no extra cost for a license if we are purchasing Rocky Linux from the AWS Marketplace.

I didn't evaluate other options before choosing Rocky Linux.

I rate Rocky Linux a nine out of ten.

If you are using any other RHEL-based OS, Rocky Linux is very similar to other RHEL operating systems.

I see some performance-related issues, but we are still checking on that, and we don't know if it is related to the OS or the resource; that is something still to be checked from our end.

I would recommend doing a POC on your existing application or use case with Rocky Linux. If it works smoothly, then observe it for a few periods, and if it works properly for your application and whatever your use case is, proceed with implementation. Each application and use case works totally differently, so if it works for some applications properly, it's not a given that it will work for every application. First do a POC, and if it works properly, then you can proceed with implementation.

I am responsible for virtualization and networking, and other services related to the systems including Linux and Windows, but the security part is actually the responsibility of the French team in our headquarter.

Currently, I am dealing with Linux systems. We were on Red Hat Enterprise Linux and because of the license system, we have changed to use Rocky Linux and AlmaLinux.

Rocky Linux is suitable for our needs. We haven't specialized applications, just managing our network. Here we construct a model of infrastructure independent which must respond to the needs of our client, and we make tests. These are tests for VBS and some electronics that are made and developed here. It's an experimental infrastructure with many dynamic changes and many needs from our project manager. With our team, we can provide support as needed. We have a very good team with high skills in Linux and development, and it works correctly with no enterprise cost or enterprise license. At the same time, we have to conform to ISO 27001. We try to have the latest patch management, and we try to use some open source centralized platforms to manage or supervise what we have.

We are using Rocky Linux on servers including Cisco UCS M5, M4, and we have some Dells 750, 740, with high-performance computing tasks. We have stronger servers.

Rocky Linux is quite good for us and for the nature of our business. By using Foreman, Katello, for example, the management system and repository for patch management is very quiet and very good for our business because we don't need more.

Until now, we haven't had any problems with integration of Rocky Linux with other products in my system.

We haven't needed technical support for Rocky Linux, but I think because of the complexity and the number of VMs that we have, we can consider going for a support contract. It's not a bad idea because, while we haven't encountered very difficult problems, with the complexity of the network infrastructure, we need to be supported by the editor.

If I find something which is strong with virtualization with Rocky Linux, it's an alternative that I can study and spend time learning about, trying it, making tests, validating, and perhaps ultimately migrating.

We haven't implemented Rocky Linux container management yet, but we have an idea to find an alternative solution to VMware because of the license model. To migrate to a solution, we need to improve our skills for the first step, and for the second step, we must be able to support the developer teams. What I'm sure about is that we are looking for a solution for virtualization in order to migrate our VMware platform.

One year ago, we switched to version 9.4, Alma and Rocky Linux, and now we are on 9.5.

I cannot answer how Rocky Linux frequent updates have aided our organization in staying secure because it's not under my responsibility, but what I am sure about is that in the next three years, we will continue to use Linux.

I cannot judge if Rocky Linux is complex to use for the first time or if it is intuitive because we use very simple applications such as DHCP, DNS, ICS. I don't remember encountering any difficulties because the infrastructure is for tests and is not an enterprise infrastructure. We haven't deployed LDAP or Active Directory. We don't have this kind of complexity or mail servers. For storage, we are using the Dell EMC storage device hardware, Unity. We don't have the complexity to communicate with Rocky Linux or other systems with our storage network. Perhaps in the future, we might meet some difficulties, which is why I said it might be a good idea to have support for Rocky Linux.

The initial setup of Rocky Linux is easy. It's well done. For my team, we haven't found any problems in the first initial setup. We work with an image with which we can reconstruct what we need of the virtual component.

We were a customer of Red Hat for Linux distribution. We studied Rocky Linux and learned from documentation and information on the internet. It's the successor of CentOS, which we used for five to seven years. When CentOS reached end of support, we tried to migrate. We got two alternatives, AlmaLinux and Rocky Linux. It seems that Rocky Linux is more similar to CentOS than AlmaLinux. AlmaLinux is based on binary, and we identified some latency when using our application. Two or three servers are working on AlmaLinux currently, and all the rest was migrated to Rocky Linux.

The initial setup of Rocky Linux is easy. It's well done. For my team, we haven't found any problems in the first initial setup. We work with an image with which we can reconstruct what we need of the virtual component.

I would rate Rocky Linux seven or eight as a minimum.

We switched to Rocky Linux because of the license price, and in our business, we don't need to have a higher cost as that is not a good idea.

We studied Rocky Linux through documentation and information on the internet. It's the successor of CentOS, which we used for five to seven years. When CentOS reached end of support, we tried to migrate. We got two alternatives, AlmaLinux and Rocky Linux. Rocky Linux is more similar to CentOS than AlmaLinux. AlmaLinux is based on binary, and we identified some latency when using our application. Two or three servers are working on AlmaLinux currently, and all the rest was migrated to Rocky Linux.

I cannot understand the meaning of the question regarding whether we purchased Rocky Linux and AlmaLinux on the AWS Marketplace or somewhere else. I am not sure if we bought our current products on AWS Marketplace.

The problem with all products now is the manner of licensing. Even international or worldwide enterprises have difficulties with the cost of the new model of license in Cisco, Red Hat, and VMware. After the Broadcom acquisition of VMware, every time we ask for a budget, we have difficulties getting what we need. It's becoming difficult for enterprises. Even though I'm working for Sagemcom, a worldwide enterprise, they don't want to spend money on this kind of license if it is not needed.

Rocky Linux is popular in my region as it's a successor of CentOS. CentOS was very popular, so everybody that used CentOS and lost the support will look for a solution to substitute it. The nearest alternative to CentOS is Rocky Linux.

I would rate Rocky Linux a 7 out of 10.

My typical use case for Rocky Linux is that it's the backend operating system for managing where we have a lot of scripts managing networks.

I don't have a use case for AI integration yet because we simply did not look into it, so I don't know if it's there or not.

The experience of working with Rocky Linux is the same as with other Linux distributions; there was no difficulty for me in learning how to work with it.

Rocky Linux is similar to other distributions. I did some research on Google, and then it was manageable without needing documentation.

To be honest, Rocky Linux is almost similar to each Linux distribution, so I have no specific reason why it should offer me its features.

I haven't noticed anything special that could be done better in Rocky Linux.

I switched less than a year ago from my previous company, and I think they have been using it for one or two years.

The experience of working with Rocky Linux is the same as with other Linux distributions; there was no difficulty for me in learning how to work with it.

First of all, there is in-house knowledge for handling technical support or community issues.

If I have specific issues that couldn't be resolved by myself, I either contact an outside ICT company with specialized engineers or contact the vendors.

We have not yet needed to contact a vendor regarding Rocky Linux.

It's equal whether it's now CentOS, Rocky Linux, or Ubuntu; actually, a bash script remains a bash script.

A server on VMware rolls out the template, so it's a one-hour job to deploy it.

It's equal whether it's now CentOS, Rocky Linux, or Ubuntu; actually, a bash script remains a bash script.

I'm just using tools, so I'm not in any decision making.

The decision is made at the customer, so it's not my decision. I'm not in any decision maker role.

All these decisions have been made. I'm just following it, and for me, there's no real preference between A or B.

I switched less than a year ago from my previous company, and I think they have been using it for one or two years.

It's a hard question to determine the most helpful or useful features in this tool.

I rate Rocky Linux eight out of ten. An eight means that I'm satisfied with it; a product having a ten never exists because things can always be better.

I have nothing really in mind that could make Rocky Linux a nine out of ten.

I have been using Rocky Linux for three or four years. It is used for HPC, online assessments, and Ceph storage.

The solution is free and open source.

The OS choice in my project is quite specific. It is based on customer requirements, as they might want to use Rocky Linux or Ubuntu, depending on their needs.

The package versions can be quite older compared to other distributions such as Ubuntu.

I have been using this solution for about three or four years.

The deployment process is simple.

I would rate the stability an eight out of ten.

The scalability is quite good, though there are some issues with Rocky Linux. I would rate the scalability a five out of seven.

I rely on self-support and community resources.

I previously used VirtualBox but now tend to use Proxmox.

The initial setup is simple.

It involves a normal setup process using a USB drive or network installation.

It requires a plain installation. The server can be set up with UI, similar to a desktop installation in an on-premises environment.

I use Rocky Linux on the production server first. For Ubuntu installations, it depends on customer requirements.

The package management system requires attention when working with Rocky Linux.

There can be some issues with scalability that need consideration.

I would rate Rocky Linux an eight out of ten.