No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

CentOS 9 (centos 9) | Support by SupportedImages vs Matterport comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

CentOS 9 (centos 9) | Suppo...
Ranking in AWS Marketplace
484th
Average Rating
8.4
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Matterport
Ranking in AWS Marketplace
7th
Average Rating
8.4
Number of Reviews
10
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Featured Reviews

Chaithanya Kutnikar - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Solutions Architect at Capgemini
Modern infrastructure has supported cloud migrations and improved secure distributed workloads
Among the downsides of CentOS 9 | Support by SupportedImages, I find that while installation becomes easier, the migration process concerning mainframes has been well-represented, especially with CentOS 9 | Support by SupportedImages 10 now integrating AI capabilities. The inclusion of GPUs and other resources to process large datasets could be a future direction worth pursuing, enhancing its abilities with RAG or generative AI through proper prompt engineering and ethics considerations. I would prefer to see more AI integrations within CentOS 9 | Support by SupportedImages. IBM is already making strides in this area by investing significantly. Following their acquisition and merger with Red Hat, CentOS 9 | Support by SupportedImages distribution aligns closely with Red Hat's, fostering AI capabilities and a futuristic approach to enhance daily operations through flexible application building on virtual machines.
CA
Resource Technology Senior Vdc Engineer at reiSource
Detailed 360° site capture has transformed project documentation and now streamlines insurance claims
Matterport needs to find a way to do what they are doing with SLAM instead of terrestrial. The biggest drawback to Matterport these days, and why other tools are being used, is that you only have a certain amount of time to capture data, and unfortunately, terrestrial devices do not really allow for that. Second, you have not made it permanent for manually aligning captures in the Matterport app. Every now and then it allows me to do a manual align, but that needs to be a standard feature. Instead of saying, 'I cannot find any alignment, please scan again,' it should give me the option of just moving the alignment myself. I understand that Matterport is built for you to need to do things in a certain sequence, but the reality is that sometimes I have to go back to rooms later on. Sometimes there are rooms that are symmetrical, and in those cases, it can really help if you have some user input. It saves a lot of time and it saves a lot of capture time. On top of all of that, the actual application itself is very unstable. You reach a certain amount of captures and the device does not work anymore. But then that messes up the entire workflow. If the project is too big to work on the app and I have to build another one, I need to create two projects and then wait for those to merge. And then I have to take both projects individually and align them to each other and let that merge again. So now I am talking about waiting a day for the thing to automatically align, and then I have to merge it manually, and then wait a day for those results. So instead of getting results in one day, I have to do it in two days, and it is all because of the reliability of the application. I think that Matterport is overpriced. At this point, there should be some SLAM integration with maybe terrestrial as an anchor if needed. And if they want to push all of these products such as CAD and point clouds from their data sets, then they should truly work on making sure that that data is accurate enough for what it needs to do. The market is oversaturated with people with Matterport devices trying to do Lidar jobs, but the accuracy is not good enough. Getting a CAD plan exported, but it is not a vector, and it is a locked-down PDF essentially makes it useless. If you want to keep things locked down and not able to be vectorized, then that seems to say a lot about the accuracy, in which case point clouds and vector CAD should not be available at all. I think that there is much to be improved. There should never be a situation where Matterport cannot find data to match and it asks me to rescan. At the end of the day, if it was using photogrammetry and something such as lighting was the reason why it cannot find any alignment points, that would be one thing, but you have Lidar included. So if you have Lidar, that means there are overlapping points, and if there are overlapping points, there should always be a match. If you cannot find a match, that means that your algorithm is not mature enough or your Lidar data is not actually accurate enough. The scalability is pretty low, considering the fact that the price to scale up sites is already immensely high, and there is no benefit to having multiple devices at a time. You can capture a site faster, but as I said, it ends up taking the same amount of time by the time it auto-processes it, I manually merge, and then have to wait for that merger to process. Somebody can go and get half of it done in one day, half of it done in another, and it will take the same amount of time. Matterport needs to find a way in its apps to allow me to merge prior to doing the full processing, so that way I do not lose that same time twice. Pricing is pretty straightforward, but it is overpriced. That is the reason I found a solution to take my Matterport spaces down and put them on a local desktop so that way it can be embedded, shared, or kept locally. The first reason is for security purposes. The second reason is because the price is entirely too high, but I understand that once you are in this ecosystem, it is hard to leave. There is only a tool, I think Doxel, which will allow me to transfer over Matterport projects into their ecosystem so that at least on their site, I can access the scans done for Matterport as well as from their own software. But there is no solution to actually take your data from Matterport and move it somewhere else. So once you join, you are basically locked in. And the unfortunate thing is that it is really set up for real estate tours as far as the pricing is concerned. So if you are using it for anything other than that, you are definitely overpaying.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"CentOS 9 (centos 9) | Support by SupportedImages is stable as far as I am concerned. It is 100% stable."
"The low cost, low maintenance, support, and latency features of CentOS 9 | Support by SupportedImages are what I appreciate the most about it."
"CentOS 9 (centos 9) | Support by SupportedImages helps with my application deployment process in general, and I get more productivity with it.I measure this productivity by the earlier build time with another OS, which was 32 minutes; with CentOS 9 (centos 9) | Support by SupportedImages, we are able to achieve the build time of around 14 to 16 minutes, down from an earlier 32 to 36 minutes."
"Matterport positively impacts my organization because I can perform many scans, and these scans are registered in an app that I can check in real time."
"Matterport was the first company for a virtual tour that I worked with and I think it is the only one that I am going to keep using because it is really the best."
"I estimate that we save about 60% of the time that would be spent going back to the site to keep re-measuring and confirming."
"Matterport is a very handy software; it is very user-friendly, and I love using it while working."
"Matterport is basically an international standard that allows, in and of itself, to make contact with customers, create new customers and retain them, and offer cutting-edge technology."
"In our project Naiken Labo, by filming with Matterport, I have seen benefits such as increasing customers' visitation rates and making it easier for them to come to the stores."
"Matterport has impacted my organization positively because we don't have to all go to the construction sites."
"I really appreciate whoever introduced Matterport and enjoy working with this equipment and its software."
 

Cons

"I experienced some lagging or crashing when I migrated to CentOS 9 | Support by SupportedImages 8; this event occurred during the early stage of that version."
"The support system is not very much up to the mark as we have with Ubuntu, and definitely, with respect to CentOS 9 (centos 9) | Support by SupportedImages, the help or support forum needs to be more comprehensive so that for many issues we need not reinvent the wheel."
"Regarding accuracy, Matterport's accuracy is basically good, but not the very best because, as I mentioned earlier, it shows the ducts and everything; it does not show the proper imagery system or the accurate output in results."
"One way Matterport can be improved is that capturing using the Matterport camera tends to be quite bulky and slow."
"The only challenge I have experienced with Matterport is the need for improved capturing methods."
"The scalability is pretty low, considering the fact that the price to scale up sites is already immensely high, and there is no benefit to having multiple devices at a time."
"Matterport is extremely slow; it takes three or four minutes per single scan."
"I am generally satisfied with Matterport, but I feel that if the shooting method were improved a bit, it would become easier to use."
"I think Matterport could be improved with better integration with CAD systems."
"Regarding Matterport's scalability, I find it very difficult to assess because it is very expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which AWS Marketplace solutions are best for your needs.
921,523 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Construction Company
32%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Outsourcing Company
8%
Comms Service Provider
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business8
Large Enterprise1
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for CentOS 9 (centos 9) | Support by SupportedImages?
Pricing challenges may be difficult for me to address since I focus primarily on technical details and tend to negotiate trade-offs based on requirements. When good hardware is present, particularl...
What needs improvement with CentOS 9 (centos 9) | Support by SupportedImages?
Among the downsides of CentOS 9 | Support by SupportedImages, I find that while installation becomes easier, the migration process concerning mainframes has been well-represented, especially with C...
What is your primary use case for CentOS 9 (centos 9) | Support by SupportedImages?
CentOS 9 is still in use in my infrastructure operations and support coming from a traditional data center background. I utilized it extensively in projects from 2022 to 2024, including retailers a...
What needs improvement with Matterport?
For Pro 2, I find it hard to scan outdoors because it is not compatible. With the introduction of Pro 3, I can use that for outdoor scanning as well. I think all the features are really cool, altho...
What is your primary use case for Matterport?
My main use case for Matterport involves documenting the parking garages in Toronto to help the design team identify the cameras and new technologies they want to install, including placements. I u...
 

Overview

Find out what your peers are saying about CentOS 9 (centos 9) | Support by SupportedImages vs. Matterport and other solutions. Updated: October 2026.
921,523 professionals have used our research since 2012.