Serious Discussion Which Linux distros world-class corporations use

[Miravi]

Here is a small sampling of elite companies from various industries found in the Forbes' Global 2000 ranking of the largest public companies in the world, and which Linux distros give them life. These companies publicize the basic OS environments of their systems, but there's also significant customization and proprietary backend software involved.

Company	Primary OS / Distro	Lineage	Package Manager	Primary Focus
Amazon	Amazon Linux (AL2023)	Fedora	dnf	AWS Graviton/Nitro optimization
Apple	Debian (Backend)	Debian	apt	iCloud stability & massive scale
Barclays	RHEL / Ubuntu Pro	Fedora / Debian	dnf / apt	Regulatory compliance & security
Disney+	Ubuntu / Amazon Linux	Debian / Fedora	apt / dnf	Global content delivery & streaming
ExxonMobil	RHEL / SUSE (SLES)	Fedora / Slackware	dnf / zypper	HPC (Supercomputing) & seismic data
Google	gLinux / Debian	Debian	apt	Rapid internal testing & security
JP Morgan	RHEL / Rocky Linux	Fedora	dnf	Compliance, security, & trading
Microsoft	Azure Linux	Independent	tdnf / rpm	Minimal container footprint & security
Mondelez	Amazon Linux / SLES	Fedora / Slackware	dnf / zypper	Cloud ERP (SAP) & supply chain agility
Nestle	SUSE (SLES)	Slackware	zypper	Global SAP/ERP supply chain stability
Netflix	Ubuntu / FreeBSD	Debian / BSD	apt / pkg	Maximum network throughput (CDN)
PayPal	RHEL (Hardened)	Fedora	dnf / yum	High-frequency financial transactions
Samsung	Ubuntu / Tizen	Debian / Custom	apt / rpm	SmartThings Cloud & IoT Hardware
Saudi Aramco	RHEL / OpenShift	Fedora	dnf	GenAI, upstream efficiency, & scaling
Siemens	Sokol Omni OS	Debian	apt	Industrial Automation & AI-ready IoT
Sony (PSN)	Amazon Linux	Fedora	dnf	Cloud-based gaming infrastructure
Toyota / VW	Automotive Grade Linux	Yocto (Poky)	opkg / rpm	Real-time In-Vehicle Infotainment
Visa	RHEL / IBM z/TPF	Fedora / Mainframe	dnf / yum	Global transaction clearing

 

[lokamoka820]

Just wondering if companies that use Ubuntu use the LTS version or the standard version.

 

[Miravi]

Just wondering if companies that use Ubuntu use the LTS version or the standard version.

LTS, no doubt. Stability and thoroughly tested reliability will always take priority over any kind of novelty. Even upgrading to new yet stable and mature LTS versions in these systems is a prolonged rollout requiring a phase of extensive testing.

Just as an example, Netflix has a long-running technology blog where they share some of their Linux escapades dealing with monumental scale and network throughput.

Eight years ago they announced the open-sourcing of Titus, the Netflix container management platform. Titus documentation explicitly recommends Ubuntu for running the platform—chosen for robust support for Systemd, XFS/Btrfs, and the VPC networking stack in AWS. Then a few months ago they wrote a detailed piece on the unique challenges of these containers at their scale, Mount Mayhem at Netflix: Scaling Containers on Modern CPUs.

 

[LinuxFan58]

May be a stupid question, but why would someone (also home users) NOT use the LTS version?

Agreed I am a noob on Linux (while using it for over 2 years), because I kept the first distro I tried (Linux Mint LTS) and only used the terminal for applying some mild system hardening (I applied maybe ten tweaks advised by a system admin I met on University who was a passionate linux/bsd fan and told me I could apply a few easy tweaks which would not bork up my system).

 

[Miravi]

May be a stupid question, but why would someone (also home users) NOT use the LTS version? I

Agreed I am a noob on Linux (while using it for over 2 years), because I kept the first distro (Linux Mint LTS) I tried and only used the terminal for applying some mild system hardening (I applied maybe ten tweaks adviced by a system admin I met on University who was a passionate linux/bsd fan and told me I could apply a few easy tweaks which would not bork up my system).

LTS is really not necessary if you don't need extraordinary stability or systems running for long periods without upgrades.

That's why LTS is separate and not the standard. There are compelling reasons that more casual users, like us at home, might stick to the standard release: because the LTS kernel is frozen for two years, drivers and hardware support are examples of things that won't continue to evolve. The lack of updates in this vein means not keeping up with the latest graphics performance enhancements.

Overall, LTS entails a "stale" software stack, even if users will try to get around that by bringing in updates by their own means. Then there's the fact that LTS versions don't upgrade software for security; they backport fixes to the outdated software. This is a complex process of maintaining the security of frozen software that is prone to missing less important, secondary bugs.

I like new software, and that's one of the reasons I use Fedora Workstation. It's plenty stable for my purposes at the same time. I also don't use an immutable system because I like to tinker and experiment, and I don't feel insecure with a less restrictive environment. Even SELinux can sometimes create obstacles in a workflow as it is.

 

[LinuxFan58]

@Miravi each to his/hers own preferences, so no dispute, just asking to understand it better.

The linux/bsd fan admin asked me whether I used the LTS version. When I said yes, he said good, LTS substantially increases both stability and security, because the kernel is so much older and when you use sandboxing (reason I use Firejail for accessories and flatseal stripped Flatpak for applications) you really reduce the chance of becoming a victim of zero day exploits.

When I asked AI, it sort of confirmed his story and gave me 9.8 (out of 10) for security (and labelled it "practically attack resistant for every day use").

I tried out newer kernels (I think @Marko :) made me aware of it), but on my Ryzen 7 laptop, that did not improve anything (I ran some real world and synthetic tests), that is why I asked why would average users not want the LTS versions (higher stability and security without performance loss).

 

[Sorrento]

I've had a notification & warning from ALL the mods on here that if I continue using Windows & not Linux my account will be deprecated to viewing only & eventually I will be banned

 

[lokamoka820]

Based on my personal experience with Ubuntu releases, the LTS version is more stable than the standard version; this could be the reason why the LTS version is always available first on the Ubuntu download page, despite being released earlier. Please understand that I do not mean that the standard version is defective or requires excessive maintenance, like Arch Linux, but it does have some issues in comparison to LTS; perhaps this is due to the short testing period between standard releases.

The answer to @LinuxFan58's question about Ubuntu LTS and why a home user like me, for instance, doesn't use it is straightforward: it gets boring. If all you want is a stable, dependable system, then LTS is for you. However, if you enjoy exploring new features, as @Miravi mentioned, you can't wait two years to try it. Ubuntu developed Snap packages to address the issues with older software versions, but I still have issues with the desktop environment itself. I began to feel that waiting two years to try the latest Gnome release was excessive.

I tried rolling release distributions and discovered that they didn't work for me either. I really like the semi-rolling distributions approach, which provides updates at shorter intervals, but again, I found something that I didn't like in each distribution that used this method (they are rare, by the way). The distribution that I found to be appropriate for me was OpenSUSE Leap; it receives major upgrades every 12 months, which is much better than waiting for two to three years like Ubuntu/Debian distributions. However, the announcement that version 15 will be the final version made me switch, and I'm currently waiting for openSUSE Slowroll to replace Leap to give it a try (it's not yet released).

 

[piquiteco]

I've had a notification & warning from ALL the mods on here that if I continue using Windows & not Linux my account will be deprecated to viewing only & eventually I will be banned

I believe that, these days, in the Linux world, I’ve noticed that "most" MT members use some kind of Linux distro—whether as their primary or secondary operating system, installed in a dual-boot setup with Windows, or even on a VM, USB drive, or external SSD/HDD. The system has become more widespread here in the community. Another factor that contributed to the significant increase in Linux users and discussions about it was that some people started opening up more, helping others, and sharing their experiences using Linux, which really helped newbies get interested in using or just trying out a Linux distro. With artificial intelligence gaining momentum lately, it’s become even easier to get some help.

 

[simmerskool]

Just wondering if companies that use Ubuntu use the LTS version or the standard version.

fwiw I have ubuntu 24.04 LTS / Gnome in VMware, but had not booted since Oct 2024. So I booted it today, updated it, runs smoothly but but seems sluggish which is what I recall from the last boot. Runs just good enough and easy enough not to delete it, ...yet. but on bye-bye short list.

 

[Miravi]

I don't have recent experience with Ubuntu, but I distinctly remember that it was the very first distro I tried. How could I not? It was touted as "Linux designed for everyone."

It was a valuable experience back then. As far as the stability and reliability of LTS vs regular/interim releases, Fedora ships its own new releases at the same frequency as Ubuntu interim, every six months. Fedora Workstation releases actually receive a more generous support lifespan: 13 months vs. 9 months for Ubuntu. That means that you can skip a Fedora release and still be on track to receive security updates the whole time.

While the release cycle is the same, Fedora is in fact more fast-paced: the rolling package releases make it a semi-rolling distro. They literally push system package updates every day—I just installed updates for Mesa (3D graphics) and some others this morning. I can expect quick kernel updates, too.

Despite the fact that it's on the cutting-edge, this is still intended to be a daily driver OS with fairly wide appeal that retains stability. I had good experiences when I tried Fedora as a noob over 15 years ago, and every time since. No one told me "Beware, Fedora isn't made for beginners." It's always been compatible with my hardware and reasonable to deal with. I learned by following the Nike slogan: just do it.

 

[LinuxFan58]

If all you want is a stable, dependable system, then LTS is for you.

That is what I want, hence my initial question Thanks for the explanation

With artificial intelligence gaining momentum lately, it’s become even easier to get some help.

Interesting idea, which makes sense. Will AI make Linux more accessible for every day users?

I asked AI and it could not (yet) correlate Linux distro downloads with rise of AI, It explained that the (slight) increase is (probably) related to

 

[Digmor Crusher]

I don't have recent experience with Ubuntu, but I distinctly remember that it was the very first distro I tried. How could I not? It was touted as "Linux designed for everyone."

It was a valuable experience back then. As far as the stability and reliability of LTS vs regular/interim releases, Fedora ships its own new releases at the same frequency as Ubuntu interim, every six months. Fedora Workstation releases actually receive a more generous support lifespan: 13 months vs. 9 months for Ubuntu. That means that you can skip a Fedora release and still be on track to receive security updates the whole time.

While the release cycle is the same, Fedora is in fact more fast-paced: the rolling package releases make it a semi-rolling distro. They literally push system package updates every day—I just installed updates for Mesa (3D graphics) and some others this morning. I can expect quick kernel updates, too.

Despite the fact that it's on the cutting-edge, this is still intended to be a daily driver OS with fairly wide appeal that retains stability. I had good experiences when I tried Fedora as a noob over 15 years ago, and every time since. No one told me "Beware, Fedora isn't made for beginners." It's always been compatible with my hardware and reasonable to deal with. I learned by following the Nike slogan: just do it.

I just used Ubuntu recently for a couple of weeks while I was waiting for my new computer, I found it pretty fast and easy to use.