CentOS Reviews

Valuable features for us are security and flexibility.

The solution has made our organization more secure than in previous releases.

We have been using the solution since its release.

Initially, I found it a bit difficult to work with as it was a totally new platform as compared to CentOS 6.

We did not encounter any issues with stability.

We did not encounter any issues with scalability.

I have never needed to use the customer service.

I have never needed to use the technical support.

I have been working with the CentOS product since the beginning of my career.

The setup was a bit complex as it was quite different to previous CentOS releases.

We performed the implementation in-house.

Stability was the main "feature". There are many Linux distributions which come with all the new software, but we have no use for these new versions if they are buggy. With CentOS, we know it just works.

Not really, as we didn't really test other distros.

CentOS and RHEL for that matter are fairly difficult for beginners, as there are no popular and widely used Red Hat-based Desktop distros. And this has a slightly smaller user base and tutorials than other popular distros.

More than five years.

No.

No.

Didn't use it. We were using the (free) community version.

No.

It was just the easy Anaconda installer.

No experience.

No.

Try it! It's an amazingly stable Linux distro.

The solution provides stability and standardization. CentOS is fairly faithful to the Linux Standards Base, Freedesktop.org, and POSIX. Pretty much any code targeted at Linux builds and runs without any tweaking. Hardware support is extensive and diverse.

It's good to have a stable server OS that many people understand in depth. It has easier to find CentOS internal experts than Microsoft Windows internal experts, for example.

Out of the box, the NFS client is weak. It needs considerable kernel tuning before it runs NFS-bound applications efficiently. Perf "goes off a cliff" long before it should with the default settings.

The auto-mounter has been unstable, although it has been getting better recently.

We've been using CentOS 5 and 6 for seven years.

It needs a kernel tuning tool. Many settings are mysterious and require considerable forum searching.

When the NFS client becomes overloaded, due to its default queue sizes that are way too small, combined with poor scheduling algorithms, it makes the host unstable.

There were no scalability issues yet.

Red Hat service is excellent. It is definitely worth the nominal license fee for access to their knowledge base.

Red Hat service is excellent. It is definitely worth the nominal license fee for access to their knowledge base.

We were using Suse Enterprise. It was too non-standard. We often ended up fighting its mysterious "Yet Another Setup Tool" to get things installed.

The setup was straightforward, until the need for kernel tuning arose. Then we were kind of on our own.

We developed an installation image in-house and we distribute it to new hosts through a combination of PXE and Perforce sync.

The ROI is incalculable. We could not do our business without CentOS/Red Hat. It's the standard platform for most of our engineering tools.

Buy a Red Hat license. It's worth it.

We used SLES for a few years on some hosts. We considered Ubuntu LTS, Debian Stable, and FreeBSD.

FreeBSD may be a better choice for network intensive applications, if your apps will run on it.

Some of the valuable features are RHEL package support and ease of use.

Free OS for multiple application support, databases, and other tools. These included Drupal, Apache, and Zabbix.

Reverse compatibility with old commands

We have been using this solution for three years.

I did not encounter any issues with deployment.

I did not encounter any issues with stability.

I did not encounter any issues with scalability.

I never called customer service.

I never called technical support.

We did not use a solution before this one.

The setup was straightforward with easy step-by-step installation for basic use.

The implementation was done in-house, coached by a highly skilled engineer.

It is free.

We did not evaluate other solutions.

We primarily use the solution for testing software and applications in the IT industry. I also study the storage system of AI on CentOS.

CentOS adapts well to many software and applications, providing good compatibility. Additionally, there are many online communities to learn from, which is beneficial.

CentOS can be somewhat difficult for beginners, as it has a complex UI, especially for those not in the IT field. Adding more support could be beneficial, though Red Hat with IBM support is an alternative that may be costly. Also, modernizing CentOS could be a suggestion.

CentOS is a stable operating system, and I would rate its stability as nine out of ten.

I do not have personal experience with customer service for CentOS.

Positive

The initial setup was very easy. I would rate the ease of setup at 8.5 out of ten.

I am not responsible for the setup cost in my company, so I am unsure about the cost of the license.

I recommend CentOS for its stability and its ability to adapt to many software and applications. It is also very accessible.

CentOS is a good and stable system. It provides everything you need for web servers and database servers.

One server can hold a few thousand users.

Installation can be done through an automated process.

The server system is a little bit tough to manage. It is not as easy as I would like it to be.

I've been using it for more than ten years.

We use dedicated servers for this solution.

The stability and performance are good.

We used a fully automated process for installation.

There are no licensing fees. CentOS is a free solution.

We evaluated Fedora.

CentOS is more simple than Windows, and I would rate it at ten on a scale from one to ten.