External reviews are not included in the AWS star rating for the product.
I still have experience with Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL), but I mainly work with SUSE Linux. The solutions are for on-premises deployments.
From what I have heard, my organization is going to use SUSE Linux as a standard. For Red Hat, the people who deal with servers have a few of them and are probably migrating them through VMware.
The part that my group deals with the most is SAP, and all that we have on them is SUSE Linux.
The main differences between Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) and SUSE Linux may be in some commands. The heart is very similar with logical volume manager and other components, but there might be commands that change, such as command line interface commands that might change even when they perform the same thing.
I believe that the best features of Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) include the interface with logical volume manager and file system management, since I work more with storage administration.
I used to deal more with Unix, and the way Unix performed things was better for me. For example, at the Linux level, all the partitioning is difficult for me in the way it uses certain terms, such as physical disk, when you call it SDB or SDBA.
From this perspective, I found this hard. I used to be more accustomed to Unix. However, they are very similar at this level with the device types and other components.
I believe that Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) can be improved in areas such as monitoring, storage, and virtualization.
Everyone today is talking about virtualization and there is a need for it. There are many virtualization implementations, and everyone is moving toward that area.
I have used Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) for several years in total.
I assess the knowledge base for Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) as good. The documentation is nice and good, and it is available. The documents I have seen are self-explanatory, and the explanations are clear.
On a scale of one to ten, I would rate Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) support as good. I know it is good, but since we usually look at the documentation, I have not placed a request for an error or similar issue. I probably have not had the need to do that. I would rate it a nine or ten. In our case, I have not dealt so much with that part, as there has not been a need to request a patch or upgrade.
Positive
I personally have not used Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) Image Builder or Red Hat system roles. I know that some of the people who give us support do use them. I know it is helpful, but I do not have details about them because my group is dealing more with the hardware parts, such as HP physical servers and storage.
We are dealing more with that aspect.
I believe that the most important security features in Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) include the standard ones, such as user and password authorization and read and write access, which are standard in Linux.
I believe that you probably want to use additional software. My company has many tools, and another team works with the security part. However, you probably need integration with that. The basic features that every Linux software has are standard and robust.
I would rate this review a nine out of ten overall.
In the banking industry, we provide software for banking, from our development infrastructure to deployment infrastructure for the banks. We generally use Linux RHEL. It is only for on-premises, but what we did was try out Red Hat OpenShift, basically on top of Linux platforms to run it on the Kubernetes enabled architecture to see how it would perform.
For us, the best features of Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) are that running it in a containerized environment makes setting up multiple Linux environments much easier than any other high-end or risk-based machines like AIX or Sun Solaris. Having more Linux boxes and setting up RHEL was much faster.
In terms of security, the most important feature in Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) is that it has a good sandbox with policies and features that are very effective. Whatever we could do in terms of hardening the Linux software, it was much easier for us.
Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) helps me solve the pain point of having a huge monolith of big AIX boxes because I could have smaller Linux boxes with Red Hat, and I was able to do both vertical and horizontal scaling much faster.
One area that could be improved with Red Hat is probably pricing. Discounts that are slightly cheaper would be better.
In Enterprise Linux, I have dealt with it for probably more than five years.
Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) is definitely stable.
In my opinion, Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) is absolutely a scalable solution. That is why I was able to do both vertical scaling and horizontal scaling very seamlessly.
Regarding their support, we did not reach out to support too much, but I thought it was good. I would rate it a nine.
Positive
Before using Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL), we used Windows, basically, and then moved everything to Linux.
We switched to Linux from Windows because there were a lot of server hangs happening on Windows, with antivirus and virus problems. Basically, it was a nightmare managing Windows, so we moved to Linux.
With the initial setup, it is very straightforward and much easier to set up.
On a scale of one to ten, if ten was the easiest, I place it at a nine.
We also do Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) with Red Hat. I would rate this review a nine overall.
The main use cases for Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) at the bank involve internal applications, as we do a lot of internal applications not exposed to clients.
From my perspective, the best features of Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) lie in its ease of use, especially compared to AIX, which has a lot of functionalities requiring extensive learning. It was easy for me to shift from AIX to Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL).
Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) helps manage our hybrid cloud environment, but being a bank, we are highly regulated internally, so there is limited direct involvement with the cloud environment in Royal Bank cloud, which is Azure.
One area I see for improvement in Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) is in the documentation. I encountered some scarcity when looking for information regarding structure, commands, and administrative tasks.
I have dealt with Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) for around 10 years, even when it was not part of IBM.
My opinion of Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL)'s scalability is that it was very easy.
I would rate Red Hat's customer service or technical support as a 10, as my experience with all IBM products, including Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL), has been very satisfactory all the time.
Positive
The initial setup of Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) is straightforward compared to AIX, which is more convoluted.
I have experience with platforms like Linux, and I am also working deeply with MongoDB and Node.js, tools that I use constantly every single day.
I am familiar with Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL), and here in RBC, we are a big IBM shop, currently using JBoss and Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) as part of our environment.
Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) is used for both cloud-based solutions and on-premises.
From a business value perspective, the business folks do not notice much difference between Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) and other distributions, as long as their application functions well, they are satisfied.
We utilize two cloud providers for Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) solutions, mainly Azure and also Amazon. I cannot answer how Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) was purchased, but I know we have it on both Amazon and Azure.
I would rate Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) a nine, as I find it satisfactory in various aspects.