CentOS Reviews

We have a team of ten who use the solution for Linux-based SIEM and network monitoring. 

We particularly like that we can remove the graphic user interface to minimize attack settings for the operating system. We access applications on the operating system from our web interface and other machines. 

We would like Red Hat to keep supporting the solution but they have decided to get rid of it and there isn't much we can do about it. 

Our company has been using the solution for three years. 

Our team loves working with the solution because it is very stable. 

We experienced a few crashes that were due to human error, not issues with the operating system. We experienced a crash when upgrading from version six to seven but managed to rectify it with assistance from the knowledge base. 

The bugs that we encountered were fixed with constant live updates that were quite straightforward and useful. 

The solution is very scalable. We started using one machine with two nodes but scaled it up to four nodes. 

I utilized support when upgrading from version six to seven and experiencing kernel issues. The technical team was able to give us excellent service and assistance.

I rate support a six out of ten because there is always room for improvement in response time. If you make a request for immediate assistance, you might not get help until a day later but when the support comes it is quite good. 

The initial setup was a bit complex but workable after training, reading through distribution papers, and increasing knowledge base. The solution can be learned and mastered after some time without too much difficulty. 

We deployed the solution in-house and sometimes got stuck but figured it out after a couple of weeks. 

The longest deployment took a month because we made a few errors. CentOS support helped us through the configuration of some applications so we managed to get it up and running. 

Setup of the solution is rated an eight out of ten. 

We use the free, open-source solution because we cannot afford the price for Linux. 

Because the solution is being depreciated, we are considering moving to Ubuntu but haven't made that decision yet. 

The operating system is very good and stable. We hope to continue to work with it, but are not sure if that is possible because Red Hat has decided to depreciate it and not develop it further. 

Considering that there will not be further development, I recommend considering alternate solutions. 

We use this solution for web applications. We are customers of CentOS and I'm head of the operations and compliance department.

The product is very efficient when it comes to virtualization and good from a security perspective. 

I'd like to see better integration with Open Stack, because it can be a bit of a struggle. The solution requires a lot of experience on Linux. I'd like to see the GUI become more user-friendly so that someone who doesn't have much experience can use it. 

I've been using this solution for 20 years. 

The solution is stable. 

The solution is scalable.

The initial setup was easy given my level of experience with Linux. Installation takes about 20 minutes, and then extra time for deploying some tools. I generally carry out the maintenance for our company.

We're using the open-source version of CentOS.

I sometimes use Ubuntu for network service. The main difference is that if you don't upgrade with Ubuntu, you have to change the source and that can create problems that we don't experience with CentOS.

If you have experience with this solution, it's a good product. Without sufficient knowledge of Linux it's important to purchase support with the product. 

I rate this product 10 out of 10.

I mainly use CentOS to host training-related applications.

CentOS' best feature is that it's the standard product for Linux, so it's well-supported.

It would be useful if reporting were included as part of the basic license.

I've been using CentOS for fifteen to sixteen years.

CentOS is stable.

CentOS is scalable.

The initial setup was straightforward and took between fifteen and thirty minutes.

CentOS is cheaper compared to Windows.

I would recommend CentOS to other users and rate it eight out of ten.

I'm using the solution for storage. It’s a specialized storage service.

The solution is very stable and secure.

It’s a simple, straightforward implementation.

For how I use it, it is a scalable product.

I taught myself how to use the solution. You don't need to worry about having to go through a very deep learning curve for CentOS. It's very easy to use.

CentOS is very close to the end of life.

I’d like them to improve the licensing options in the future.

I’ve been using the solution for a while. We’ve used it since version five and are now on version eight.

The stability is good. There are no bugs or glitches. It’s reliable. It doesn’t crash or freeze.

I usually work with smaller companies. Therefore, I don’t have issues with scaling. For me, it scales. I’m using one or two-tera hard drives, and it works well with no issues.

I have one client with ten users and other clients who have a bit less than that in terms of users.

We do not have plans to increase usage.

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

I installed CentOS from the command line and administer it from the command line or web media.

The initial setup is simple and straightforward.

I'm using it for different clients, one or two servers for each client, so I don't use it. I don't deploy it, I just do an individual installation.

The central source is under an open-source license. I use it this way due to the fact that I don't need any license for using it.

Even though it is near the end of life, I would recommend the solution to others.

I’d rate the solution ten 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.

CentOS is a platform that is specifically used for tools that are required in our organization.

We found a way to adapt it to our own needs.

It's one of two platforms that can work with the tools we use; without it, we couldn't do anything.

The most valuable feature of this solution is that it is free.

Continuous deployment is the only thing that can be improved.

I would like to see support in the next 10 years. They will discontinue support for some CentOS versions.

I have been working with CentOS for four years.

We're not working with the most recent version, but rather the one before it.

Only the most recent version is unstable. The versions previous and the most recent are usually stable.

It is a PC-only solution with CentOS installed on each PC, making it scalable.

We have 10 users in our organization.

We have no plans to increase our usage.

We have not contacted technical support. We haven't needed to.

I am also familiar with Xilin.

The initial setup was straightforward. I would rate the initial setup a two out of five.

It took approximately an hour to install CentOS on a PC.

We did not use a third party such as an integrator, reseller, or consultant. We completed the deployment ourselves.

CentOS is free.

There are no additional costs.

We evaluated Red Hat Fuse, which is a CentOS variant. We used CentOS as it's free.

I would recommend that you determine which CentOS version was used because some versions will no longer be supported in the coming years.

I would rate CentOS an eight out of ten. If they would continue to support the previous version, I would rate this solution a 10 out of 10.

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.

We use CentOS for our transactions and our data warehouse server. We established a replication between those servers.

The user interface of CentOS is intuitive, we can also use the command prompt. 

When comparing the GUI of CentOS to Microsoft Windows or Mac, it could improve.

I have been using CentOS for approximately eight years.

CentOS is open-source has good performance and is stable.

CentOS is a scalable solution.

I have not needed to contact technical support.

The installation of CentOS is simple, The solution can be used on servers and on personal computers. You are always able to pick what packages you would like to use with the installation.

There are no costs for CentOS, it is open-source.

We successfully installed MicroStrategy 10, Composer for PSP, Laravel, and many PSP libraries on CentOS. 

I would recommend CentOS to others if the users want to have an open-source solution.

I rate CentOS an eight out of ten.

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.