CentOS Reviews

On CentOS, we use Docker to run our different services, which are interconnected among themselves.

As far as my experience with CentOS is concerned, it's a stable product. It is stable and reliable.

The initial setup is very easy.

They could add a tool or a dashboard where we could properly monitor the machine's performance rather than using different commands. If a proper GUI-based tool was connected remotely or on the machine, it could be a great addition to CentOS.

I've used the solution for the last five years. 

It's a stable product. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

There are 1,000 people using the solution. 

I've never dealt with technical support. Our DevOps team takes care of issues and troubleshooting.

Before joining the current company, I was using Ubuntu Linux. When I used CentOS the first time, I didn't find any hurdle or issue in using that OS.

It's easy to set up the solution. It's not overly complex.

As far as the installation is concerned, it hardly takes an hour, based on the configuration or the software we want to install. After that, it's another hour or so to configure it as per our needs.

I can't speak to the pricing. The DevOps team handles that aspect of the product. 

My organization asked us to identify the possibilities of using Oracle Linux. That's why I am studying options.

We're end-users.

The solution can be deployed on the cloud and on-premises. 

I personally also tried to work on CentOS 8. It's easy to use.

I'd recommend the solution to others. 

I would rate the solution nine out of ten.

I chose CentOS because it's easy to understand and user friendly. If you read the code base and know the operation system that you're using and which folder contains which part, it's easy to use.

I started using CentOS because our website customers started to increase, and I couldn't manage them. I realized I needed to make a structured system to start this, and I installed the website panel from Windows. I started using Windows, but I was mostly making websites like Joomla, Mambo, and WordPress, which aren't compatible with the IIS system from Windows. I started having some problems with the email service from Windows.

For the past two years, I have been providing this solution to my customers. Currently, there are four people using this solution. One person does SEO for the back-linked part of a project. Another person works on UI/UX, and I also have a VHMGC engineer that knows the Smarty framework.

I'm using the terminal based version of CentOS, but I also prefer to use software that I build. For example, I use Plesk GUI, but if there's a problem, it's not fixed with my software interfaces. I have to log into the terminal and create it. I can use one of my machines that resides in my system with the proxy under the security. I have a lot of servers, so I'm able to log in on any terminal or the Windows space.

I'm a software engineer. I'm also working on a robotic base with the Raspbian base. Raspbian is the same as Linux, so I'm using the Debian part.

I'm using direct CentOS distribution from the ISO, but I'm not using the cloud. There are many differences between the cloud and dedicated servers.

There are a lot of sources on the internet that you can use to solve any issues, and people share their experiences. It's not a closed system.

The security could be improved because the server system isn't very secure. I prefer to use Cloud Linux because of the CPU base, and they have CageFS technology. Cloud Linux isn't open-source.

I don't immediately update the solution because I want to wait for a stable version.

I would like them to provide features on GitHub or any docker core without any installation.

The problem with CentOS is that updates are made by the community's free sources, which can cause problems. You have to dig in deeply to realize what the problem is.

I have used CentOS for 22 years.

The solution is stable.

It's scalable. I would rate the scalability as nine out of ten.

I haven't used technical support. I always use the community resources and forums.

Initial setup is easy. The amount of time it takes to deploy the solution depends on your computer's speed and parts. Eight gigabytes/four core can take 20-25 minutes.

The solution is open source. Sometimes I donate a little bit of money to support the solution.

I would rate the solution as nine out of ten. CentOS is a very flexible system.

My advice is to first activate the GUI in the desktop version, or else you won't be able to understand it.

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.

I am using CentOS for hosting applications.

The most valuable features of CentOS are it is built from Linux, has good performance, and can we can create scripts. The scripts are you to do minor work automatically.

If CentOS could add Office features then that would be beneficial. Additionally, the UI could improve.

I have been using CentOS for approximately three years.

CentOS has been stable in our usage. We have had one server up for five years without any problems.

CentOS is scalable. However, it is depending on the deployment. We use Docker for our applications so we have not scaled the solution, but if the bandwidth is good then CentOS can be scaled.

Our entire company infrastructure is using CentOS. When I host an application, it's usable by about 1,000 people.

The support is handled by our other team. Even though I'm facing an issue, I talk to our team. If they cannot handle it, then they scale it to the CentOS support team.

I use MacOS, Windows, and Ubuntu on a daily basis.

For a server environment, I would recommend CentOS, but for normal usage, I would recommend MacOS.

When you buy a Mac it just comes with MacOS which is beautiful to work on. If I'm using a Windows laptop, I would go for CentOS. However, the problem with CentOS is there is no Microsoft Office.

For the enterprise version of CentOS, there is a license required. However, for personal use, I do not need a license.

My advice to others is if they have a server environment then I would recommend CentOS. It's stable. One of the only letdowns is the repository for some applications, it takes time for CentOS to adapt.

It has to do with the ecosystem of CentOS, I'm not sure. When comparing CentOS to Ubuntu, if Ubuntu comes out with a release today and a few days later you see you can install it.

I rate CentOS a seven 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.

We use CentOS for repository features.

There could be more integration features included in the product.

We have been using CentOS for five years.

It is a stable product.

We have five CentOS customers. It is a scalable and cost-effective product compared to public cloud solutions.

The initial setup process is easy. It requires five executives for deployment, including managers, admins, engineers, and developers. It takes around a month to complete.

We take the help of a reseller to implement the product.

We don’t have to pay for the system’s licenses.

I rate CentOS a nine out of ten.

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. 

Our primary use case for the solution is utilizing it as an OS in a virtualized environment. It helps us install and deploy our applications and other services accessed by other users, internally and externally. The solution is deployed on-premises.

We have found the ease of integration valuable. The solution is easy to integrate with other applications and with other services. For example, if you want to deploy something, it simplifies the integration with other applications and services.

The solution could include more integration of third-party solutions to check on the quality and vulnerabilities of the code.

We have been using the solution for approximately two years.

The solution is stable.

The solution is scalable. Approximately 1000 users are utilizing the solution.

The initial setup was straightforward, and deployment took two to four hours.

We implemented the solution in-house. Five developers are required for deployment.

The license is affordable. I rate the price a ten out of ten.

I rate the solution a nine out of ten. The solution is good, but the integration can be improved, and more security features could be included in the next release.

The primary use case for the solution is to host web servers, application servers, or databases.

The most valuable feature of the solution is the stability and performance of the server.

The solution is an open-source version of Red Hat without some of the features. The solution can be improved by including some of the Red Hat features for free.

I have been using the solution for over ten years.

The solution is extremely stable.

The solution can be scalable depending on what you are using the server for. If you use the solution as a visualization system, it is scalable, but difficult to scale without having to use additional tools. Linux-based solutions require a lot of manual work unless other tools are used to automate.

The solution is open source and does not have any official support only other users on forums. 

The setup is straightforward for advanced users and administrators. If you are a beginner the setup can be quite difficult, especially with the partitioning phase. The basic installation on the premises only takes ten minutes. If you are installing on the cloud there are a few extra steps that can take up to 20 minutes such as the provider's security, networking, public IP addresses, and some rules that have to be configured before the system is ready.

The implementation was completed in-house.

The solution is open-source and does not have any costs or licensing fees.

I give the solution a nine out of ten.

This solution is no longer supported and will not receive any updates going forward. Oracle Linux is similar to the solution and is also Red Hat compatible. I recommend that anyone thinking about using this solution switch to Oracle Linux.

For anyone interested in trying the solution there is a lot of information and support that is freely available online.