I work in infrastructure. We have various use cases for Red Hat Enterprise Linux. We use it for the compute feature, which runs on some applications on the front end and databases on the back end.

LVM is a valuable feature. It enables us to dynamically increase the file systems or logical volumes. My journey with this feature started 10 to 12 years ago.

LVM is the reason why I started using the solution initially. Nowadays, there are a lot of applications. We can use clustering, security, and optimize security.

The product's availability is on the main cloud hyperscalers, like GCP, IBM Cloud, Azure, and AWS. The product should be made available on Oracle Cloud.

I would like to see Ansible as a default in future releases.

I have been using the solution for 13 to 14 years.

Although some questions are not business-critical and high priority, they are still urgent. The support identifies such questions as P3 or P4 incidents. Although there's no business impact, we depend on the support team for answers.

We have used SUSE Linux. We have also used open-source tools like Ubuntu, Fedora, and CentOS. We switched to Red Hat Enterprise Linux due to its vast exposure to security vulnerabilities. Its support model, subscription model, and its support for HANA are valuable.

We use the product on-premise, on IBM Cloud, and on Azure. The subscription model of the solution enables us to use hybrid environments. We can enjoy the benefits of the hybrid environment with the bring-your-own-subscription model.

We have plans for upgrades. We have a legacy Red Hat Enterprise Linux. One of the customers has version 5. We are trying to build an upgrade plan for it. We would like to know whether we can directly land on version 9 or if we should go step by step to each version.

The solution's built-in security features are exciting. I like that the solution covers the recent vulnerabilities in the CVEs. The solution should continue to do that.

Overall, I rate the product an eight out of ten.

We are an Azure shop that runs middleware applications like Java and JBoss, running on the Azure back end. We have to redeploy everything via ARM templates. Anytime we do an upgrade of the application itself, it's a redeployment. We have custom images that we set up through Azure pipelines. We use Ansible for code changes and server changes.

The solution's stability is great, and patching it with Ansible is very easy.

The solution's licensing sometimes could be a little bit confusing for someone who's not a full-blown system admin and doesn't have a lot of experience with Red Hat Enterprise Linux. It took a while for me to understand the licensing.

I have been using Red Hat Enterprise Linux for three years.

Red Hat Enterprise Linux’s built-in security features for simplifying risk reduction and maintaining compliance are pretty good. My only exposure is just packet management, but packet management gives me everything that I need.

Red Hat Enterprise Linux has enabled us to achieve security standards certification. We have to stay on top of things because we work with the Ontario District School Board. There's a big emphasis on keeping everything secure, and the solution has helped us to do that.

Right now, our company is migrating to 8.8, and I think we will stay on 8 for a few years. We're doing everything through the images, and we keep everything updated with Ansible. I don't think we have any plans to use any of the automation tools other than Ansible.

Overall, I rate Red Hat Enterprise Linux ten out of ten.

My primary use case is for web applications and database applications. I've come across quite a few use cases at different companies.

The most valuable feature is the package management. It helps a lot. I also like the support.

Red Hat is a Linux-supportive and well-managed offering. It helps a lot in terms of when we're working in production, it gives us the confidence that our packages are legitimate and genuine and we always have support available. It helps a lot. Red Hat Enterprise Linux gives peace of mind compared to other unsupported Linux distributions.

I also like Red Hat Satellite.

I haven't used Insights yet but it seems interesting.

The ability to patch Red Hat Enterprise Linux through Satellite is a huge contributor to mitigating all of the compliance requirements.

Red Hat Enterprise Linux has absolutely affected our security's uptime. None of the other distributions are nearly close to what you can get with Red Hat Enterprise Linux. Red Hat Enterprise Linux is something that helps a lot in ensuring that your secure application is up all the time and that you're not getting hit by vulnerabilities. It is an easier way for you to mitigate vulnerabilities when they're around.

The knowledge base is very useful. The only thing is that you need to have an account to get access. In terms of the content, the relevance, and being able to use the knowledge base to address things I've needed to deal with, it's awesome. For example, I was trying to add proxy configuration to the package manager once and if it wasn't for the knowledge base, I wouldn't have been able to do it.

I like it the way it is.

It's getting easier for the community to use it free of charge. If you have an account, you get to use it. It would be better if the community could use it on their own for lab projects.

I have been using Red Hat Enterprise Linux since 2011. It's been 12 years.

On the few occasions I needed to reach out to support, I was very satisfied.

I have used Linux distributions but when it comes to the work I'm doing at my company, we always use Red Hat Enterprise Linux.

The biggest differences between Red Hat Enterprise Linux and the other OS' are the support, Satellite, Insights, and the fact that Ansible was acquired by Red Hat so you can use all its automation and toolings. The entire ecosystem works very well together.

Red Hat has not personally enabled me to achieve security standard certifications in the projects I've worked on but I could see how it would help.

I would rate Red Hat Enterprise Linux a ten out of ten. I really like it.

We do a lot of patching and upgrading with Ansible and we keep the host up to date all the time.

Red Hat Enterprise Linunx's most valuable feature is patching.

I am not happy with Red Hat's support. It is difficult to find knowledgeable people. It's hard to troubleshoot.

I have been using Red Hat Enterprise Linunx since 2009.

We used Solaris before Red Hat Enterprise Linux. Solaris' environment is closed, while Red Hat Enterprise Linunx is open-source.

Red Hat Enterprise Linunx's knowledge base is good, and you can find answers there.

I rate the product a nine out of ten.

We use Red Hat Enterprise Linux across different versions, from six to nine, to run various applications. Our main area of focus involves using Satellite support to manage and patch both the Red Hat Enterprise Linux OS and specific applications like OpenShift and other products supported by Red Hat. We have multiple environments, including Azure, AWS, and a standalone eXs host.

Red Hat Enterprise Linux's patching process needs improvement, particularly in achieving consistency. Currently, when you patch, you might not have control over the timing, leading to different software packages ending up at different patch levels. This lack of consistency can make it challenging to manage and control the various components effectively. My background is in IBM AIX, so the patching is based on the technology level and the service pack level, so all the related patches stay at the same level.

I have been using Red Hat Enterprise Linux for ten years.

I would rate the knowledge base offered by Red Hat as average. I would rate their support as a three out of ten.

We also use IBM AIX. I prefer AIX, but Red Hat Enterprise Linux is cheaper. However, IBM has real technical support. You can call a 1-800 number and get a technician on the line. That's real technical support. Red Hat requires you to email them and schedule a call.

Overall, I rate Red Hat Enterprise Linux as a five out of 10.

I don't see Red Hat Enterprise Linux's built-in security features as effectively simplifying risk reduction and compliance. We use AIX, but still, we face a lot of vulnerabilities from Red Hat that need frequent patching, often monthly. This frequent need for updates, along with the rapid changes in Red Hat Enterprise Linux releases, can be frustrating and lead to instability. In the banking industry, where we take vulnerabilities seriously, these frequent releases and lack of stability can be problematic.

We use Red Hat Enterprise Linux in different application servers.

The tool's most valuable feature is simplicity. There is value in having a fully CLI-based operating system instead of a GUI-based one. It is lightweight and can be leveraged without resource constraints.

I want Red Hat Enterprise Linux to stick to the open-source routes. As a company, we experience challenges in managing the budget.

I have been using the product for three years.

From a licensing perspective, Red Hat Enterprise Linux is flexible. We leverage our licenses based on the VMware cluster.

Accessing the knowledge base from the public perspective is challenging. You can get much more from the documentation if you are a supported organization. If Red Hat Enterprise Linux continues to keep the documentation open-source, it will benefit us.

We leverage Ansible to help with the upgrades. It makes upgrades easier. We rely on a reseller for Ansible AWS upgrades.

We are shifting our Red Hat Enterprise Linux servers from version 7 to version 8.

I rate the product a seven out of ten.

We are moving toward a microservice architecture and using OCP4 as a platform. We run most of our APIs in OCP ports, so the base image is always Linux. It's a Linux image, and we add our own dependencies. We have a private and public cloud, so it's a hybrid cloud system, and we rely on on-premise data centers as well as the cloud.

Red Hat Enterprise Linux supports our hybrid cloud strategy because we can have Red Hat Enterprise Linux on the public and private cloud, improving compatibility.

If the compatibility is high, it's easier to move and migrate. If I have some components on the private cloud on Red Hat Enterprise Linux and components on the public cloud.

Red Hat Enterprise Linux stands out for its stability and support, which are critical for enterprise applications in the finance sector. We don't want any downtime, so we need fast support and quick issue resolution.

The main security feature is the regular patches and updates. When we do a security scan, there should be patches readily available. Security is essential in finance, and Red Hat Enterprise Linux helps us build a solid IT infrastructure foundation.

I've used the Red Hat Enterprise Linux Web Console to configure the products. It's a nice tool with an intuitive interface that gives you a better picture of what you're configuring. It's helpful.

Red Hat Enterprise Linux should be available in a free version that developers could try on their own machines before deciding to implement the enterprise edition. It would be nice to have a community version available with all the features so developers can become more familiar with Red Hat Enterprise Linux.

I have used Red Hat Enterprise Linux for more than nine years.

We haven't experienced any major outages or downtime. Most of our issues are quickly resolved. We don't typically upgrade to the latest and greatest because we want to ensure stability, and we have a lot of the components on the old system. We wait for a while to upgrade so we can see the most widely used and most stable version.

I rate Red Hat support eight out of 10.

We had Satellite and Red Hat Enterprise Linux from the beginning, but we also use other flavors like Amazon Linux.

I rate Red Hat Enterprise Linux nine out of 10.