CentOS Reviews

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.

We use this solution for any server that needs the database, for any service applications that are Linux compatible.

We use a specific version for each user, but when we do a system, we use the latest. We deploy the latest version except when a vendor specifies a different version.

Usually, the developers request service for themselves and then the people using those servers will be varied. There are so many people using this solution that we cannot determine the exact number. There are some internal systems like finance or HR, for example. So, the numbers are not consistent.

As more products and requests come out, I think we are increasing the number of users.

The solution is deployed on-premises.

The good thing about it is that it's free.

I would like to see more frequent updates.

I have been using CentOS for more than five years.

It's very stable.

It's scalable.

For support, we just use internal skills.

We were also using SUSE Linux in Windows.

Setup is straightforward. You can complete it in about 30 minutes.

Deployment was done in-house.

It's freeware, so we can use it without worrying about licensing.

I would rate this solution 7 out of 10.

I use CentOS for business applications and personal applications. Because Linux is an operating system, the use case will differ from person to person. We used it to host our scripting servers and infrastructure layout.

I like how you can alternate certain things and minimize admin features on there and just let it run on specific scripts. It's nice. Even if I had to put it in a container, I'd still do it. I prefer Linux over Windows any day.

The price could be better. They could add more drivers in terms of peripherals and other things. Add more drivers for the Linux specifications in the next release. Right now, they are just pushing to have more drivers for Windows instead of Linux.

I have been using CentOS since 2010.

CentOS is a stable solution.

CentOS is a scalable solution.

CentOS tech support is fine.

At the time, there were quite a lot of options like Linux, Red Hat, and Ubuntu. But if you're already using these commands that work here, they will be the ones that work there. So, we chose CentOS.

The initial setup is straightforward. 

The cost depends on how the organization or a specific person licenses it. If you want the free version, there's Ubuntu which is supported by forums. You can pay for the license yearly or pay for a specific version.

I would recommend this solution to potential users.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give CentOS a nine.

Many of my customers use Linux as their client operating system because it is more secure. Since it doesn't have a UI and there are a lot of anomalies and viruses affecting the UI-related applications, some customers prefer to have an operating system without a UI. I have seen most people use CentOS, Red Hat, or Ubuntu as a client operating system or server.

CentOS is very easy to use, and all the commands are user-friendly. Installing any package or application is pretty easy with CentOS. Security-wise, most of the latest security software and applications are compatible with CentOS. Updating the patches for CentOS is very easy.

CentOS is a stable, consistent, and secure solution.

The solution’s stability could be improved.

I have been using CentOS for three years.

CentOS is a very stable solution.

I rate the solution an eight out of ten for stability.

The solution is very scalable. CentOS is very good for any microservices or any application that has an auto scalability mechanism available. The number of users usually depends on how many users can access the OS through the network based on the bandwidth.

The solution provides good technical support for all flavors of Linux.

The solution’s initial setup is very straightforward.

The solution’s deployment takes hardly 10 to 15 minutes. You can use the image to manually deploy the solution, or you can use the DevOps or any automation methods to deploy it.

CentOS provides very good cost efficiency. It is a very efficient operating system without any hassle or inconsistencies. I don't see much difference between CentOS and Ubuntu. Ubuntu has a few more user-friendly commands than CentOS. Once you are familiar with the flavors, CentOS is also very user-friendly. For a new user of Linux, Ubuntu is a little bit easier.

Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

It is good for ensuring that only approved applications are allowed to run. Other applications, which have not been approved by IT, are picked up as violations. You really can define at the start of it, what is approved, what is not approved, and you can clearly identify if there's an exhibition of unapproved applications and that get filtered or blocked by the tool.

The security and IT team can go back and question the user to see why that particular application was run or maybe do further investigation in terms of seeing if that machine has attracted any malware.

The solution is stable.

It’s scalable.

The initial setup is pretty simple.

The solution could be a bit more user-friendly. In terms of commands, it's all CLI and there isn't any GUI which can make it challenging to use for some people.

We have been using it for the last two years.

The solution is very stable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn’t crash or freeze. It’s reliable.

We have found that the solution can scale.

Our company has 15 to 20 users leveraging it right now.

I’ve never directly dealt with technical support. I can’t speak to how helpful they are.

We were using Redhat Linux. We just had the application need, which is why we adopted this product.

It was just an application requirement. The application we are managing requires CentOS, which we had to install. There wasn't any choice.

For CentOS, the setup itself is straightforward. It didn't take much time. We installed it in one day. It was just the image that was installed. It also doesn’t take much staff to deploy or maintain the product.

The licensing is per device.

I’m not sure which version of the solution we’re using. It might be version 8.

I’d recommend the solution to others. However, it all depends upon if the application needs it. If there is an application dependency, yes, you will need that. However, it'll come from a specific need.

We have not been using the OS as such. We have been just managing the application on the OS. We have been only supporting the application. We don't do anything, particularly on CentOS. We are doing all the settings on the application that's running on top of it.

That said, the product is okay. It's good, stable. It hasn't given us any issues, and we have no performance problems. I’d rate it overall an eight out of ten.

The solution is the equivalent to Red Hat, so everything is good and very equivalent. If you can't afford to have Red Hat, you can use CentOS. I primarily use the solution for testing purposes. 

The product is stable.

The scalability is good.

It's less expensive than Red Hat. The product is open-source.

As an open-source solution, there isn't much technical support. 

I've used the solution for a few years now. It's been a while. 

The solution is stable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. Its performance is good.

I've never scaled it or tried to. That said, it must be. It is just a replica of Red Hat, and therefore it must be.

I use the solution myself, for personal use. My business unit is using this product and we may expand it to one or two more people. We wouldn't scale up to more than that.

I've never directly dealt with technical support. I cannot speak to how helpful or responsive they would be.

The product is kind of open-source. I am not sure of the support model for this one.

We also use Red Hat.

The solution is not complicated. It is straightforward in terms of the setup process.

I'm able to handle the installation process myself. I do not need the help of any integrators or consultants. 

If a company cannot afford Red Hat, they should use this product.

It's an open-source solution.

I'm dealing with version seven or eight at this time. I can't remember which one. 

I'd recommend the solution to others.

I'd rate the solution a seven out of ten. If there was more support available to users, it would get a higher rating.

The product is based on Red Hat and very stable. 

The tool has no official support. 

The product helps us to create applications. 

We had used support in the past and it was good. 

The product's setup is simple. You can deploy the solution in one hour. 

I would rate the product a nine out of ten. One admin is enough to maintain the product. 

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.