Fedora 44 ARM (Fedora Cloud 44) | Support by ProComputers

My main use case for Fedora Linux  includes workstations, development and testing, as well as testing alpha releases, beta releases, and getting to know how things will shape up in Red Hat Linux, as Fedora is the downstream which gets into Red Hat Enterprise Linux . My main use cases for Fedora Linux  also encompass generalistic all-purpose usage.

Fedora Linux has positively impacted my organization, since we deploy it on endpoints as well as servers. In both cases, the system behaves very predictably, is very operable, and is very manageable with Fedora Fleet , making deployment an easy transition. Make  and model based deployment becomes easy with it, so it is straightforward to implement, operate in an organization, as well as to maintain a fleet of Fedora Linux systems.

I have noticed specific time savings and a reduction in support tickets since using Fedora Linux, with measurable outcomes. Standardizing on Fedora Linux means that whatever we deploy, whatever we do, it is consistent. Standardizing on Fedora Linux from various distributions has reduced our ticketing volume by at least fifty percent where applications deployed a certain way behave in a predictable way, and if errored out, it can be reproducible and resolvable easily.

Fedora Linux offers cutting edge and bleeding edge drivers and applications, most of which are tested. They are not just early releases. Most cutting edge advancements, desktop features, several drivers, enhancements, adaptability, accessibility, and speed have been present in Fedora Linux for a long time, as the developers have been experimenting and providing these features for many years.

Out of all those features, I personally find the bleeding edge drivers to make the biggest difference in my work because we deploy it on endpoints, and a lot of newer hardware chipsets come across. Finding an optimal driver for them is difficult, whereas Fedora Linux eases this by providing appropriate drivers and including vendor-driven drivers or vendor-agnostic drivers. I find it very easy to implement, to install, and to operate, and by operate, I mean not manual operations, but automated operations. So far it has worked out very well.

I would add that the KDE rollouts, Systemd rollouts, and the modernization of the X graphical window system are features that highlight how Fedora Linux is on the cutting edge of everything.

Fedora Linux can be improved with more engagement from the community, as well as other aspects to have common purposes such as network-attached storage based distributions or firewall based distributions or purpose-built appliances based on Fedora Linux. Promoting Fedora Linux in cloud marketplaces would also be beneficial, and I do not see any evangelism around Fedora Linux that could not be improved.

While the documentation is adequate, the finer details and technical documentation in complex architectures, specifically clusters, network attached storage, and purpose-built firewalls could use improvement. More engagement from community managers to promote Fedora Linux and evangelize it to demonstrate that Fedora Linux is the best use case for enterprise or wide deployments would be great. Additionally, if Red Hat provides a way to support Fedora Linux without going to Red Hat Enterprise Linux , but supporting Fedora Linux where workstations can be managed and patched in a certain way, that would be beneficial.

I choose seven out of ten because sometimes the bleeding edge drivers do cause problems. Although they have been tested, they have not been tested very rigorously, and they do cause problems. Since we also get the cutting edge drivers, software, and other components, some of them may not have been proven or may be buggy, and deploying them might lead to issues. We have come across a couple of occasions where these buggy device drivers have caused problems. A more thorough testing across the platforms and publishing those results, specifically what hardware it has been tested on, what the outcomes were, and what the benchmarks are, would be helpful to avoid the pitfalls and problems.

I have been using Fedora Linux for twenty years.

Fedora Linux is quite stable in my experience.

Fedora Linux scalability is pretty good; on a scale of one to ten, I would rate it around eight because it is easily scalable depending upon workload, clusters, and the kind of clusters deployed.

I find the customer support satisfactory. Since I have not experienced anything on pricing or license agreements, we depend upon community support, which has been great.

I have not previously used a different solution, as we have been using Fedora Linux for a long time.

I have seen a return on investment, with relevant metrics indicating that we can implement any Fedora Linux with PXE, which is very easy to implement and maintain. We have set it up some time ago, and we are simply adding the required ISOs or distributions to it. From a deployment perspective, it is very easy to deploy with PXE network boot, and it functions well. We have not reduced any staff, however.

My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing has been straightforward. Since I use community Fedora Linux, I have not experienced anything on pricing or any enterprise-wide agreements. From a setup cost perspective, since we implement and maintain it ourselves, it is only the staff hourly costs and the maintenance cost on the infrastructure. There is no licensing model involved.

Before choosing Fedora Linux, I evaluated other options like Debian . However, Debian  was difficult to maintain post some releases, and distribution upgrades were troublesome and broken. This evaluation occurred about twenty years ago, but since then, I have been using Fedora Linux for twenty years.

My advice to others looking into using Fedora Linux would be to consider its stability, predictability, and long-term association, as it works on cloud, hybrid cloud, on-premises, endpoints, and servers. You can accomplish all sorts of things with Fedora Linux.

More marketing, more evangelism, more community support, and more improvements on endpoint Linux support would be beneficial. I would rate this review as seven out of ten overall.

My main use case for Fedora Linux  is desktop and running servers. I do not use Fedora Linux  for calls; I use it for managing servers. For instance, I work with llama.cpp, ComfyUI, Jellyfin, Kubernetes  clusters, and various other kinds of servers related to infrastructure software.

I think the best features Fedora Linux offers include great package management, a great way to use immutable distros, and compatibility with any desktop environment. Fedora Linux is very modern, with packages that are almost as up to date as Arch Linux in terms of kernel updates and package management. Additionally, Fedora Linux is very well integrated with Podman, which is a great open-source alternative to Docker  for containerization that does not come with the big fees associated with Docker .

Out of those features, I find up-to-date packages to be the most valuable in my day-to-day work. Besides the up-to-date packages, Fedora Linux is also very stable for something that is up to date. It is well tested because professional software engineers working for Red Hat contribute to Fedora Linux. While packages are up to date, that does not compromise stability, unlike some streams of Ubuntu  which tend to be a bit flaky. Fedora Linux tends to be less flaky even though the packages are more up to date.

Fedora Linux also has a great image builder, which is useful when running a large fleet of servers, allowing you to build images easily using the cockpit web interface and flash those to all your servers to keep everything consistent across different servers on a cluster.

A specific example of a task that became easier because of Fedora Linux is building custom images of Fedora Linux and then deploying those images on all our servers. This ensures that there are no differences in packages or configurations. Additionally, Fedora Linux is very well integrated with a tool called Ansible , which is also a Red Hat product that allows you to make idempotent changes on servers. Fedora Linux's integration with Ansible  is seamless because they share the same company and general team working on them.

Using Fedora Linux impacts my organization positively by making it easy to manage and keep things consistent across different groups. Additionally, Red Hat Enterprise Linux  is very ubiquitous within large corporations as the premier professional Linux distro with the most stability and support contracts. This allows us to test out new features in Fedora Linux and ensures stability by the time they are pushed to production.

I think that the best way to improve Fedora Linux would be to offer a sort of Red Hat Enterprise Linux  stable edition that is about six months behind the normal Fedora editions. That way, users could have something similar to an Ubuntu  LTS version for free. Many people choose Ubuntu over Fedora Linux because of the LTS commitment that allows them to avoid frequent updates. Fedora Linux's dependency on Red Hat Enterprise Linux , which requires payment, can be a barrier for startups that cannot afford a better distribution, leading them to prefer Ubuntu LTS for its free offering.

I also hope that they continue to improve Podman and its compatibility with Docker. There is a compatibility layer that allows you to run Docker-style commands with Podman behind the scenes. The more they can make the command line interface look like Docker, the easier it would be for people to migrate, saving them money over time, since both are OCI  compliant container platforms.

I have been using Fedora Linux for about 10 years.

My advice for anyone looking into using Fedora Linux is to keep it updated and make the switch from Ubuntu and Canonical products. I think you will see the difference in quality. Additionally, do not worry too much about package updates; you can compile and install things yourself, ensuring you do not have to deal with instability issues. The belief that Fedora Linux is more unstable because it is more up to date is a myth, as I have not found that to be true.

Regarding Fedora Linux's AI capabilities, I find its governance and security very good. Fedora Linux does not force AI into places where it should not be and makes it easy to keep information private, unlike Canonical with Ubuntu, which tries to force the use of snap packages or sends data off. Therefore, Fedora Linux is conducive to compliance and security considerations and is as good as any Linux distribution for supporting AI use cases by running models and inference locally.

Regarding the accuracy and reliability of AI output on Fedora Linux, it depends on the model you are running. This aspect has nothing to do with Fedora Linux itself; it is about how you set up your models and the servers running them, as well as the quality of your code. Therefore, this is not the responsibility of Fedora distribution maintainers; it falls on the software engineers.

I believe Fedora Linux is the best balance for a Linux distribution, especially for people trying to stay ahead of the curve and for companies that prefer not to pay for Red Hat Enterprise Linux . Switching from Ubuntu is worthwhile because it is not as unstable as one might think and offers faster access to new AI driver features on a newer kernel. I would rate this product a 9 out of 10.

My main use case for Fedora Linux  is supporting and troubleshooting Wiley applications, running development tools, and testing software in Linux environments. At Wiley, we use Fedora Linux  for development, automation, and support-related activities where a stable and flexible operating system is required.

We use Fedora Linux for troubleshooting application services-related issues in our development environment. We also use it to run various scripts, shell scripts, and analyze logs, integrations, and validate software behavior before changes are promoted into higher environments. Fedora Linux is part of our daily workflow for development and support activities.

In my experience, its best features are the stability, performance, and developer-friendly ecosystem. It is the main thing that we rely on Fedora Linux for. It provides access to the latest open-source technologies and provides a reliable environment for our developers and QA engineers to work with. The package management system is straightforward, easy to use, and updates are easy to manage.

The flexibility of Fedora Linux helped our team tremendously because new team members can quickly get their development environment running without extensive configuration, and most of the tools we require are readily available, allowing developers and support engineers to become productive in a short period of time.

Another thing I would like to mention is the balance between modern features and reliability. It performs well, is highly customizable, and provides excellent support for developing and scripting environments.

It impacted our organization by providing a consistent platform for development, testing, and support operations. It also enables us to work efficiently across various projects and technologies while benefiting from a secure, well-maintained, and open-source ecosystem.

I would like to have more simplified troubleshooting guidance for certain hardware and driver-related issues. It generally works very well, but there have been occasions where diagnosing compatibility issues requires significant investigation, going through logs, and community resources.

It would be useful if Fedora Linux provided more detailed root cause analysis and user-friendly diagnostic information for hardware, networking, and virtualization-related errors. This would help reduce the time spent on identifying complex issues.

I have been using Fedora Linux for three or more years.

Fedora Linux is stable enough so far.

Fedora Linux actually scaled very well, and it supports a wide range of use cases, from individual developers to larger enterprise workloads. I have not experienced any scalability-related issues.

We primarily rely on Fedora Linux community, documentation, and online resources.

So far, the community support is great.

Previously, we used Windows-based environments for developing and support tasks. We then moved to Fedora Linux because of its flexibility and strong open-source ecosystem.

As I mentioned previously, the flexibility of Fedora Linux system has helped our team immensely. In our project, we usually have shuffling team members, so each new team member has to get their environment up and running to do their development and supporting. The flexibility of Fedora Linux helps tremendously to adjust to that and bridge that gap.

I think Fedora Linux is in the sweet spot of providing all the necessary features without overwhelming the users of the product.

I do not know exactly about AI capabilities, but so far it has provided great security. We did not have many security breaches. We are getting constant updates for the packages to keep up with security patches.

My advice would be if you are looking for a Linux operating system that will help you grow your business and is easily customizable and flexible to your requirements, Fedora Linux is the right choice. It will improve your business without a doubt. I would rate this product a 7 out of 10.

My main use case for Fedora Linux , which I typically used when it was my primary operating system, involved exploring various Linux distributions like Ubuntus and Debians, and I experienced a nice and smooth environment with Fedora Linux . Fedora provides up-to-date packages, strong community support, excellent developer tools, and a stable Linux environment, closely following Linux development, which is beneficial when working with embedded Linux and open-source technologies.

A specific example of a project where Fedora Linux was particularly helpful involved my work during college and in my current project, where one specific task was automating the flashing of our car platform board. I developed a shell script that used serial communication and terminal multiplexing to load bootloaders and application images into the target board. Fedora provided a stable environment along with scripting capabilities, serial communication tools, build utilities, and debugging tools, enabling me to develop a reliable script for automating tasks.

Regarding how Fedora Linux helped in my projects, I would say it is very helpful, streamlining developments, debugging, and automation tasks. It offers a very rich set of development tools, and Fedora community is very up-to-date, providing updates and resources shortly. The strong support for open-source software makes it an efficient platform for embedded Linux development and daily engineering work.

The best features of Fedora Linux include excellent tools and resources such as e-tutorials, Learn  Linux TV, Linux administration tutorials, and various YouTube channels providing paid resources for Fedora Linux. There are also official Fedora resources available such as documents from the official organization site, along with structured courses from Red Hat, Linux Foundations, and Udemy.com.

Among the features and resources, I find Red Hat and Learn  Linux TV to be the most valuable as they provide some of the best resources for an embedded Linux engineer. I found detailed information on these platforms that significantly aided my work.

When discussing the features of Fedora Linux, I would highlight the debugging tools and management of tasks and internal resources within the distribution as some of the best features it provides, making Fedora Linux very scalable and useful.

Fedora Linux has positively impacted my organization and my work by providing essential debugging tools and internal applications that helped in developing shell scripts and automating tasks. It significantly impacts my daily work and my projects.

To improve Fedora Linux and make it more feasible to use, I suggest adding better out-of-the-box support for specialized hardware debugging tools and vendor-specific SDKs from an embedded software engineer's perspective. Support from Fedora community regarding hardware and SDK integration for different platforms would be helpful, as well as simplifying manual configurations required for certain development tools. Despite that, Fedora Linux provides a robust and efficient development environment.

In terms of needed improvements regarding community support or any other aspect, I find the community to be fine.

I have been using Fedora Linux since my college days, and until now, I was using Fedora Linux, but currently, I am not using that. In my previous company and during college time, I used Fedora Linux as my primary operating system.

I would like to share my experience with Fedora Linux where it helped streamline scenarios such as the flashing process I previously explained. Automating that required several manual steps, and I optimized these workflows through scripting, with Fedora Linux providing the best connectivity with hardware and optimized tools to support the development of my shell scripts.

I suggest that others looking into using Fedora Linux should definitely try it. Fedora Linux is a very smooth and fine Linux distribution, providing a very good development environment, and it is worth using for anyone looking for a solid workplace Linux distribution.

Overall, this distribution offers a nice work environment, and working with Fedora Linux is a fine experience. If you are seeking a nice development environment, I recommend choosing Fedora Linux. I would rate this product a 9 out of 10.