macOS is much more user-friendly and designed for the novice user. Linux, while providing excellent performance, is not a system that regular non-expert users feel comfortable with out of the box. Windows is more complicated to support because it must accommodate a wide …
macOS just makes sense to me. Each OS has its pros and cons.. macOS works for me. It's well designed, intuitive, and efficient. But it's not cheap... well, macOS is basically free, but you need the hardware to run it, and the hardware isn't cheap. Pick the right tool for the …
Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL)
Verified User
Engineer
Chose Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL)
I much prefer Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) over Windows. There is way more customization and flexibility, and being able to use Linux as the OS over Windows gives additional flexibility for various use cases. I prefer the intuitive use cases of Mac, but the lack of …
Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) is better than all of the operating systems I've used, except for macOS. macOS gives the best of both worlds, smooth and clean GUI with tabs for everything you could possibly need, along with the strengths of Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) with …
Windows 11 has more stability and great functionality compared to older windows versions, and the gap between windows and Linux has shortened. You can pick from different OS’s to build enterprise level software on nowadays. But Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) is still among the …
Macs, macOS, and the appropriate Mac applications really shine in ease of use. Specifically, the system's media-handling features are excellent. The developer frameworks (libraries) are excellent and provide easy programmatic access to the operating system's features. macOS is very stable and is built on a solid foundation of a Unix kernel. The Swift programming language is very approachable, and macOS supports many scripting and programming languages, opening up a wide variety of coding libraries.
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.
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.
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.
I'm sure I'm biased. I've been using a Mac for 30+ yrs. I am significantly more productive on a Mac than on any other platform. It comes down to some personal preference and familiarity, but I just think the interface is more intuitive and streamlined
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.
macOS tends to be very reliable, and Apple distributes updates as needed to patch known vulnerabilities or issues. It is very seldom that a macOS-based system is unavailable, and if that happens, the cloud-based storage and identity management support make it very easy to slot in a loaner machine while the user's primary machine is repaired.
The Apple Silicon hardware allows macOS to perform very well, with rapid response. Local processing for Apple Intelligence-related items is quite fast, and the response is impressively complete. Our experience with integrations to other enterprise systems is that the other system is usually the bottleneck in the process, rather than macOS.
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.
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.
macOS is very easily deployed with central MDM/DDM management systems. There are several of these available to select, depending on the amount and type of deployment needed. We use Jamf Pro to support a "zero touch" deployment model, which makes it almost as easy to deploy 100 endpoints as 10 (other than delivery and unboxing).
