The SUSE Linux Enterprise Server is distribution of the Linux operating system originally developed in Germany.
N/A
Ubuntu
Score 8.6 out of 10
N/A
Ubuntu Linux is a Linux-based operating system for personal computers, tablets and smartphones. There is also a Server version which is used on physical or virtual servers in the data center.
N/A
Pricing
SUSE Linux Enterprise Server
Ubuntu
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
SUSE Linux Enterprise Server
Ubuntu
Free Trial
No
No
Free/Freemium Version
No
No
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
No setup fee
Additional Details
—
—
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
SUSE Linux Enterprise Server
Ubuntu
Considered Both Products
SUSE Linux Enterprise Server
Verified User
Anonymous
Chose SUSE Linux Enterprise Server
Performance is much better of SUSE Linux Enterprise Server than other product which I have used.
SUSE Linux Enterprise Server works well with the SUSE Manager, it really simplifies everything. We also do have SUSE 4 SAP, and the SUSE Manager is able to manage them all, even other (up to date) Linux distributions. Patching has never been that easy and the SALT integration …
We find SUSE to be as good or better in all categories especially version upgrade paths. Once you have in upgraded a 10 year old OS 4 full versions with only 5 reboots in 3 hours you will not want to go back to dead end rebuilds.
We went straight to SLES when we initially started migrating oracle to hana since at that time, HANA came on a pre-installed server that had to be purchased from an official vendor, and SLES was the only allowed OS. We stuck with SLES after we became certified to do our own …
For our environment, SLES provides a more cost-efficient, standards-based Linux with Enterprise support available than their competitors. They also provide the best compatibility between their enterprise Linux and community distributions.
For running SAP workloads, I'd definitely recommend using SLES. AIX is running on power infrastructure which is very pricey and RedHat required a different license and a lot more parameterization to get SAP up and running properly.
SLES is comparable to RedHat, where both of them have massive customer loyalty in their own niche markets. However, RedHat is much widely used, even though both of them are RPM-based. RedHat has the backing of the USA tech companies which just make them a giant compared to …
It is very similar, but SLES wins on the manageability front, with good built-in tools, the ability to upgrade major versions, and the ability to run on the latest Power 9 systems. It is our platform of choice for SAP; there is great collaboration between SAP and SUSE, and it …
We consulted our service provider on their recommendation and made some research ourselves. It was a hands down win for Suse Linux on both fronts so we readily chose Suse Linux for our operating system of choice. Red Hat and Centos would almost be of the same distro package, …
We have been using RHEL in most of our other projects. We chose Suse Linux for their pricing model and ease of patching. There is no other major pros and cons of RHEL over Suse Linux and vice versa.
RHEL was licensed product which was denied by lot of our clients as it was increasing the infra cost. With fedora and debian we had lot of issues related to other supporting tools that we were supposed to use for application deployment. Fedora is also consuming lot of memory …
I used to always recommend Ubuntu, but with Snap being done by default and causing issues, I've been moving away from it more and more. I'd really like to use Ubuntu, but until Snap is purged, it won't be my go-to for desktop Linux.
It's better than MacOS and Windows, while the Kali Linux was made for different purposes, so there can't be a head to head comparison between Kali and Ubuntu. As far as the MacOS and Windows, the Ubuntu is better, first, it's a FOSS software, and second, it has better support …
Zorin OS, Pop OS, Manjaro, Debian, etc. Ubuntu [Linux] was selected simply because of it's wider support and long-term viability. I know that I can deploy Ubuntu [Linux] images and not have to worry about them. It's just an easy choice.
Other alternatives for Ubuntu are Windows, Mac, Fedora, Mint Linux, Debian etc. While Ubuntu is free to use, Windows is an expensive OS, while for Mac you need to buy expensive Apple Hardware. I haven't had the chance to use other distributions of Linux, but as far as I know, …
So the main reason behind selecting Ubuntu among others was the easy implementation of services in it. Apart from that, as compared to other Linux its GUI is far more better to use and learn. The support of Debian packages and other software implementations are also great in it.
Ubuntu Linux gives the user more control over the workings of the computer and provides fewer interruptions to a productive workday. It also does not intrude with long updates constantly for dubious features for a work environment. Long term support also means that the hardware …
Sometimes I also use Linux CentOS but Ubuntu Linux is widely used, so software and other debugging guides are easily available on the web for Ubuntu Linux. It's also very easy to install Ubuntu Linux on new system and have it running in no time. Also, graphics of Ubuntu Linux …
A viable, free, widely used alternative to any modern operating systems on the market. Ubuntu [Linux] is constantly improved, has an enormous user base, a very good community. It's one of the most advanced Linux distributions of today, and can be highly customized to the point …
I use Ubuntu Linux because it's Linux and because it is the most popular distro. This means that when I google things about it, I'm highly likely to get the answer I need.
Windows 10: Expensive, with more security problems, more difficult to keep updated and less variety of free / open source applications. Its use encourages bad information security practices. OpenSuse Linux: A different distribution at source (Suse Linux), use of rpm packages …
We chose Ubuntu largely because of the large user base and because desktop setups can be easy to learn for people used to Windows computers and, of course, other distributions of Linux. Not a single one of the people we work with has had formal education or training with …
I've used other Linux distributions like Debian, Mint, Suse, Slackware, and others. I also ran OpenBSD as my primary OS for more than 3 years. We maintain FreeBSD based servers as well. Other than Debian, the supported hardware and packages doesn't seem as good as with Ubuntu …
We mainly chose Ubuntu Linux for its broad compatibility and package availability. Where we have a choice we prefer to deploy software on a Linux platform rather than Windows. Ubuntu is supported by our backup software and we find that updates typically complete without errors. …
SUSE is a European-based Linux system company, I have used it extensively over a couple of months and it's stable. I have always loved CentOS and for the past 4 years, I have used this OS as my primary workstation OS. You just don't need to reboot the system ever, it just is so …
We compared against Windows 10, Manjaro, and Fedora. Windows 10 lost on cost, and even usability versus Ubuntu. Manjaro and Fedora are both bleeding edge, providing great features but lacking the stability offered by Ubuntu. Ubuntu is the best of both worlds for us, providing …
Prior to selecting Ubuntu Linux, we looked at CentOS Linux. Obviously, both are distributions of Linux, with Ubuntu hailing from the Debian lineage, where CentOS is derived from RHEL. Ultimately, we decided on Ubuntu because it's a bit more user-friendly. However, we could …
If I had to pick one server OS to use forever it would be Windows but I'm glad I don't have to do that because these are both great OSes. Ubuntu has many strengths such as being free, it's package management system, and its ability to seemingly run forever if left untouched. …
We chose Ubuntu because it has lower licensing fees and better free support. We like Debian-based distributions in general, and Ubuntu in particular. Other Debian-based distros we use include Kali and Mint. We've also done trials on Fedora on the desktop, but found that Ubuntu …
While the major Linux releases are all fairly mature and stable, I find Ubuntu to be the release I turn to the most. It has a consistent look and feel that spans across the various versions of Ubuntu, which I really like. It is easy to install and configure, and updates are easy.
SLES is a good fit for running supported enterprise applications like SAP, HANA, oracle,.. We use it to run all our SAP workloads, and so far everything has worked great. All libraries are right in the repository, all documentation is correct and the support answers really fast in case you have problems.
For a regular not tech savvy user, Ubuntu [Linux] is a piece of cake once installed, and for the tech savvy, super simple to install. And even for the not as tech savvy it is easy.
Server specs don't need to be great, it'll run on anything, though what cpu/memory you'll need depends on your use case.
The support window for service packs after a new SP is released is too short.
Community engagement is low.
There are times when supported packages fall too far behind and create compatibility issues with applications. The Open Build Service usually provides a way around this, though.
I'd like to see Canonical REALLY betting on desktop Linux and move one step forward with innovation in that area to improve user adoption.
Desktop UI decisions have been not-so-happy in the past. The ability to move back and forth with Unity has pushed a lot of users in favor of options. Having REAL desktop environment options is something to improve as well.
Improvements in interoperability with other OSes would be very welcome. Sometimes it's just hard to communicate with MacOS or Windows across some protocols. Maybe it's due to the private nature of these protocols, but alternatives are around, we just need to compile and improve them.
For the breadth of services, features and overall performance, I believe Suse Linux is a great choice for any enterprise. It still has to grow a bit in areas like online help forums and documents, but we are pretty much satisfied with our choice.
I gave it 10 out of 10 because it allows me to do the work I need on a server, such as running a website and database, and making developments. In addition, thanks to its easy and useful interface during installation, it can be easily installed. In addition, thanks to its easily accessible documents, when a problem occurs, it can be solved easily and quickly.
It's great for basic support issues. But it's less suited for anything that is either obscure or uncommon, and it is very hard to escalate, unless you've built a relationship with your vendor/salesperson.
We did not use the managed commercial support, but instead relied on community forums and official documentation. Ubuntu is very well documented across both instructional documentation from the developers themselves as well as informal support forums [ServerFault, YCombinator, Reddit]. It's easy enough to find an answer to any question you may have
SUSE Linux Enterprise Server works well with the SUSE Manager, it really simplifies everything. We also do have SUSE 4 SAP, and the SUSE Manager is able to manage them all, even other (up to date) Linux distributions. Patching has never been that easy and the SALT integration is also working without any problems.
A viable, free, widely used alternative to any modern operating systems on the market. Ubuntu [Linux] is constantly improved, has an enormous user base, a very good community. It's one of the most advanced Linux distributions of today, and can be highly customized to the point that almost any requirement can be filled with it.
It allows a very small team to manage a large number of servers, due to its automation and manageability.
SAP supports it very well, making it straightforward to manage. There are also "recipes" for Oracle which has all of the requisites to install an Oracle DB; which helps with deployment immensely.
It lets us run large SAP instances in SLES on Power, helping us with support, manageability, and performance.
Support costs are high, but required for SLES for SAP.