CentOS Reviews

CentOS is an operating system for business. Basically, it is used for application servers used for deploying.

We've improved ourselves via testing. 

When we want to create a new environment or test a new product, for example, if we have to deploy maybe testing passwords with high ability, we first try to deploy it. 

We prefer to use a CentOS platform for testing new implementations. Basically, we don't have to spend money and resources when we are not very secure in implementing a testing solution.

CentOS is compliant with Red Hat packages, so we don't have to spend on a subscription for little projects or small projects. That's the reason we use it.

The initial setup is easy.

It is scalable. 

The solution is stable and reliable. 

It's free as a community product.

The package manager could be improved. For example, for my background, I prefer Debian. For me, the Debian package managing it fits a better solution. Sometimes using RPE and packages is a little complicated trying to resolve some dependencies.

The GUI interface could always be better. 

I've used the solution for around four years. 

The solution was stable. There were no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze.

It is a scalable solution. 

We do not have plans to increase usage. We may, in fact, reduce usage as we migrate. We are trying to migrate to Kubernetes however this is a very slow plan. For maybe three or five years, we will continue using Red Hat or CentOS.

We have about ten people using the solution. They are IT administrators. 

We never had CentOS support. Right now, we use Red Hat support. In terms of Red Hat support, it's a very good. If we have issues, we often turn to the community first. 

For the production environment, we use Red Hat Linux and for the testing or relevant environment, we use CentOS.

Right now, with a Kubernetes solution and maybe we need a new solution as we are trying to move onto SecureNet. If we use, for example, EKS and right now, maybe in the future, we don't need to deal with an operating system. In the future, if we cause CentOS, we might use it in a smaller, more basic implementation.

We did not use anything previously. 

The implementation process is very easy. When I started to learn about Red Hat, for example, it was a little difficult. Right now, it's very, very easy.

The deployment took 15 minutes to half an hour. It didn't take long. 

We have three people that can handle deployment and maintenance. They are computer science engineers or people with a Linux background.

The initial setup was handled in-house by our team. We didn't use any consultants or integrators. 

We are using the community version. It is free.

I did not personally compare other different solutions. 

We're a customer and an end-user.

We are using the latest version of the solution and are working on a migration.

I'd recommend the solution to others. 

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

We used the solution as an operating system. We were using CentOS because it supported the Red Hat flavor. Now that CentOS has stopped providing the support, we have switched to Alma OS.

We used the solution as an operating system. The solution is simple to use.

Currently, CentOS is not providing support, so you will not get new packages that are compatible with that operating system.

The solution provides good stability.

I rate the solution’s stability a nine out of ten.

Around 70% of our organization is using CentOS.

We previously used Ubuntu. We switched to CentOS because it was a business requirement, and our clients demanded it.

CentOS is an open source that is free of cost.

I would recommend CentOS to other users because it supports the Red Hat flavor. It is easy to integrate the solution with other tools and systems.

Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

In my company, we use CentOS to work in my test environments on my laptop. I didn't implement CentOS on the enterprise server.

My company uses it like a work server, and I got access to services provided by Apache and ManageEngine, which I used to deploy solutions, especially the minor ones like Elasticsearch. I didn't use other solutions because of security reasons in my company. I use it for testing purposes related to DNS servers, directory servers, binding servers, and Hyper-V servers, which are minor cases.

CentOS is not very different from other solutions apart from its distribution since it is a free edition of Red Hat.

I find the solution's stability to be the most valuable feature of it since I have been using a virtual machine with the help of the solution since 2015, and it still works on all the laptops in my organization.

I don't think any improvements are needed in the solution since we can just use it to test Red Hat before deploying it in our IT environment. We can learn more about CentOS from Red Hat.

In the future, CentOS should provide a free or open-source version for its community, which can involve improving and testing it.

CentOS NetworkManager is an area of concern in the solution that needs improvement, and it is the same with other products from Red Hat. CentOS NetworkManager was better earlier compared to what it is nowadays. The implementation or configuration would be better if there was some new CentOS NetworkManager available.

I have been using CentOS for seven to eight years. I currently use CentOS 7. I haven't got ISO on my laptop to use CentOS 8 in my test environment.

It is a highly stable solution.

It is a scalable solution. When testing the product, I found its scalability features very stable while considering its impact on the testing phase I was involved in with the tool.

CentOS has no technical Support since it is an open-source or free edition platform. If I face any issues or I want to learn something about the product, then I would have to learn them through the online communities for the tool. In Linux, you can find every documentation you need by doing a simple Google search or on the online communities created for CentOS.

The initial setup is the same as installing an ISO file in Red Hat. The product allows me to configure the IPS and allows me for automatic configuration, making a big difference. If a person is familiar with Linux, the setup phase gets easy. If a person is familiar with Windows, installation will be hard for the first time.

Considering the use of the solution for my company's test environment, the deployment process takes only a minute or two.

There are no cons in CentOS or Red Hat products. The cons are mostly found in Microsoft products.

It is completely easy to maintain the solution. I haven't faced any issues with CentOS. For CentOS, I have a virtual environment on my laptop in a VMware workstation. If I face any issues with CentOS, it will be because of VMware workstation owing to the version or edition I use.

CentOS is a good product for testing and learning purposes. You can go with CentOS or Linux if you are into cyber security.

With CentOS, I didn't conduct or operate myself in a GUI environment for testing or learning purposes.

I rate the overall product a ten out of ten.

I use the solution as a web application server. I use it with Apache. 

It's saved us a lot of money on licensing. 

I like that the updating is very easy.

It's saved us a lot of money based on the licensing structure.

The solution is stable and reliable.

There's lots of great documentation available. 

The initial setup was easy for me. 

I do not need any extra features. Nothing is missing from the solution. 

We are aware that the licensing has shifted, and it's not a change we've liked. 

I've been using the solution since 2017.

It is a very stable product. There are no bugs or glitches, and it doesn't crash or freeze. 

I've never scaled or clustered in any way, although I do have it in multiple systems. 

I do not have plans to increase usage since that changed the way the licensing works. 

The documentation is excellent. I've never actually reached out to technical support. I've needed to leverage support services since the documentation is so strong. 

Since they have changed their licensing strategy, we are using more Ubuntu. 

I have the solution in Red Hat Linux. It's easy if you understand what to do. You do have to have some level of knowledge, however. It's not for non-technical users. 

I've had it deployed on-premise and on the cloud. 

We have witnessed a strong ROI. It manages our web applications very well. 

I'm not well-versed in licensing. It's almost free. The cost is very, very low. 

I started with version seven, and now I'm on version eight. 

Now that the licensing has changed, I'd advise potential users to be aware of this.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten. The stability and security are good. 

I primarily use the solution for personal and testing purposes. It's used as an operating system. 

The solution is easy to use. The performance is good.

The community and knowledge base are very robust.

It has a lot of great features. 

It is stable and reliable.

I have found the solution to be scalable. 

The support could be a bit better. They should be more customer friendly. They could also be a bit faster. 

I've used the solution for many years. I've used it for almost five years at this point. 

It's stable. I'd rate it nine out of ten for reliability. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. The performance has been fine. 

The solution is scalable. I'd rate the scalability nine out of ten. 

I'm not sure how many people are using the solution in my company. 

Support could be faster and more responsive. However, support is okay. 

Positive

I'm also using Ubuntu. 

The initial setup is very straightforward. It is not complex. I deployed both on-premises and cloud options. It only takes a few hours. 

I followed the documentation for preparing the nodes and the administration. There's good documentation for configuring time zones, networks, et cetera. The steps are pretty standard. 

We had development and infrastructure teams on the solution. However, only one person can handle the deployment. I only have details on just my team and area. I'm not sure what it was like across the company. 

I handled the implementation in-house by myself. 

I've never looked into the ROI of the solution. 

I do not handle licensing. It's not in my scope of work.

I've used the latest version of the solution. 

I would recommend the solution to others. I'd advise people to have a clear view of how they will use the solution and take care to consider how they would like to scale. 

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten. 

This solution is mainly used for testing and development purposes.

The latest version of this solution has everything built in, making it comprehensive and very easy to use.

There is no notification before updates are applied to the solution, which occasionally means that new functionality isn't compatible with how the product is currently being used, and causes issues.

I have been working with this solution for around 10 years.

I have found this solution to be stable during my time using it.

This solution is very scalable, you simply add a node and expand a cluster so that you can scale out on your containerization.

The initial setup for this solution is straightforward and very self-intuitive.

This is an open-source solution, so there are no licensing costs involved.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

CentOS is one of the standard platforms we use to perform jobs.

There was a team of 15 people who were using this solution.

In Microsoft Windows, we store the data in a graphical way, but in CentOS we can store the data based on the command. That is the specialty of CentOS.  In Windows, you can store the data in folders, and anyone can still see that data. In CentOS, it's more secure.

I like the command prompt of CentOS. It's very simple. You can share your files based on command prompt.

I would like the integration to be more secure.

I've been using this solution for one year.

It's stable.

It's very scalable. It's open-source.

We're also using Solaris. We're mostly using these for database storage to fix details and manage the organization data.

Installation is simple. It doesn't take much time. It's just a simple operating system.

The price is very good.

Once you buy the license, Linux will provide you with yearly or monthly patches, so your systems will be scalable for a long time. You can decide whether or not you want to install a patch. They're giving patches instead of going for automatic updates because some of the services will not work.

I would rate this solution 10 out of 10.

I would recommend this solution 100% for someone who is working in IT.

We have very varied, different uses. Mostly it's an appliance for applications.

It's required for some of the applications we have. In order to run those applications, we have to have CentOS.

It's easy to install.

They're changing how they're working, and I really enjoy the easy updates. Now they're going to a streaming version, which I don't like. We want to control the updates manually. We have an application that we don't want to be updated without our knowledge.

If you want to do something special on install, you can. But when they have 68 questions about how you want to install, you answer each one of them. A very simple, default install would be nice.

I've been using CentOS for more than 12 months.

The solution is extremely scalable. We have about 200 people using it at this point, mostly engineers or database guys.

We'll probably have a minor increase in usage, but not a huge increase in how many nodes we'll have.

CentOS has no technical support. You just look it up if you have a problem.

Red Hat is the paid version of Linux. They take out all the Red Hat stuff and make CentOS Linux with no support. But a lot of people use it, and a lot of people post. So if you have a problem, you just look online and it's fine.

I did use Red Hat a long time ago, and I switched because they couldn't seem to decide how they wanted to charge for their service. I was perfectly happy to just pay them, but it would range by huge amounts. I couldn't maintain that.

The initial setup is in between straightforward and complex. It could be easier. There are too many options, and I'd like a lot less.

Deployment takes a half-hour, and we did it in-house. One person, myself, takes care of deployment and maintenance.

There are zero licensing costs for the solution. 

There are admin costs. We run it on VMware, so there has to be VMware cost.

There were a few other options, but CentOS is heavily used and that helps.

Just be aware of the changes they're about to make, which is from the regular updates to streaming. That's major.

I would rate the solution nine out of ten. It's easy to install, it's easy to manage, it's free.