Fedora Linux vs. Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL)

For experimental use, test lab situations, or very special-purpose tasks, Fedora [Linux] is an excellent choice. We are almost exclusively a CentOS shop for our production stuff, but in labs, we take more risks with things like Ubuntu or Fedora. It's not as appropriate as CentOS for production level endeavors, but it lets us know "this is where we could be going" when we engage in r&d tasks.

Incentivized

Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) is very good at simple server and desktop workloads if much isn't expected out of the functionality provided out of the box, but relying just purely on Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) does not provide enough for broader use. It's common to rely on EPEL for this, but Red Hat doesn't offer support for EPEL.

Incentivized

• frequent updates
• DNF as the package manager
• strong focus on security

Incentivized

• Virtualization, like the operating system level task. I see this product is very good and it blends very well with the middleware components like all the JBoss and other things. And other than that, either you install it or a virtual machine or physical servers, it works seamlessly anywhere. And if you want to go further, like Red Hat OpenShift or those things also work very nice with it.

Incentivized

• Stability. It's good, but it's not anything like CentOS for stability
• End-user usability. It has a few glaring holes here and there with UI/UX

Incentivized

• Price. Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) can be cheaper for us to use. We pay a lot for these software packages.
• Perpetual licensing. Buy it and forget it would be great, with support as an option. this would be a great option for products that can ship with the OS and will see little internet use.

Incentivized

We find RHEL to be a superior OS with stable operations and long life. It is also easier to use and fix then most other OS's.

Incentivized

This is a personal preference based on working with hundreds of client projects, I prefer Ubuntu over Fedora Linux.

Incentivized

In order to securely deploy Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) it has to be installed without a user interface. Administrative tasks through a command line interface can be challenging. Looking up commands and testing them, documentation is often required in order to run the same commands in the future if the changes are infrequent and not practiced often by an administrator.

Incentivized

Product support and regular patches.

Incentivized

As with any OS enhanced testing will need to be done prior to application integration.

Incentivized

Red Hat support has really come a long way in the last 10 years, The general support is great, and the specialized product support teams are extremely knowledgeable about their specific products. Response time is good and you never need to escalate.

Incentivized

Don't be afraid of it, its easy to install and configure for the tasks needed.

Incentivized

We are an all-CentOS-shop, but we've done a number of things with Ubuntu and Fedora. Most of the production CentOS machines are only there because prior to that Fedora helped to blaze the trail to get there. It's been a very good platform for testing our new ideas. Ubuntu is similarly positioned in our organization, but Fedora stacks up well in our environment.

Incentivized

It's superior. I mean they're all Linux so it's all that code, but I find that the intangibles that you get with Red Hat, meaning the enterprise support, the lifecycle, that's what clearly makes it better than the rest of them.

Incentivized

Operational ease of use backed by support

Incentivized

• Shorter LTS means more administrator work
• Security patches help reduce vulnerabilities to help save money

Incentivized

• RHEL provides a good base OS and additional tool sets for various deployments.
• We are able to use Satellite to manage hundreds of OS's behind our corporate firewall. No other OS provides the level that RHEL does.
• It is a known good quantity. Their support for the OS is amazing.

Incentivized