CentOS Reviews

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.

In my company, we use CentOS to work in my test environments on my laptop. I didn't implement CentOS on the enterprise server.

My company uses it like a work server, and I got access to services provided by Apache and ManageEngine, which I used to deploy solutions, especially the minor ones like Elasticsearch. I didn't use other solutions because of security reasons in my company. I use it for testing purposes related to DNS servers, directory servers, binding servers, and Hyper-V servers, which are minor cases.

CentOS is not very different from other solutions apart from its distribution since it is a free edition of Red Hat.

I find the solution's stability to be the most valuable feature of it since I have been using a virtual machine with the help of the solution since 2015, and it still works on all the laptops in my organization.

I don't think any improvements are needed in the solution since we can just use it to test Red Hat before deploying it in our IT environment. We can learn more about CentOS from Red Hat.

In the future, CentOS should provide a free or open-source version for its community, which can involve improving and testing it.

CentOS NetworkManager is an area of concern in the solution that needs improvement, and it is the same with other products from Red Hat. CentOS NetworkManager was better earlier compared to what it is nowadays. The implementation or configuration would be better if there was some new CentOS NetworkManager available.

I have been using CentOS for seven to eight years. I currently use CentOS 7. I haven't got ISO on my laptop to use CentOS 8 in my test environment.

It is a highly stable solution.

It is a scalable solution. When testing the product, I found its scalability features very stable while considering its impact on the testing phase I was involved in with the tool.

CentOS has no technical Support since it is an open-source or free edition platform. If I face any issues or I want to learn something about the product, then I would have to learn them through the online communities for the tool. In Linux, you can find every documentation you need by doing a simple Google search or on the online communities created for CentOS.

The initial setup is the same as installing an ISO file in Red Hat. The product allows me to configure the IPS and allows me for automatic configuration, making a big difference. If a person is familiar with Linux, the setup phase gets easy. If a person is familiar with Windows, installation will be hard for the first time.

Considering the use of the solution for my company's test environment, the deployment process takes only a minute or two.

There are no cons in CentOS or Red Hat products. The cons are mostly found in Microsoft products.

It is completely easy to maintain the solution. I haven't faced any issues with CentOS. For CentOS, I have a virtual environment on my laptop in a VMware workstation. If I face any issues with CentOS, it will be because of VMware workstation owing to the version or edition I use.

CentOS is a good product for testing and learning purposes. You can go with CentOS or Linux if you are into cyber security.

With CentOS, I didn't conduct or operate myself in a GUI environment for testing or learning purposes.

I rate the overall product a ten 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.

This solution is mainly used for testing and development purposes.

The latest version of this solution has everything built in, making it comprehensive and very easy to use.

There is no notification before updates are applied to the solution, which occasionally means that new functionality isn't compatible with how the product is currently being used, and causes issues.

I have been working with this solution for around 10 years.

I have found this solution to be stable during my time using it.

This solution is very scalable, you simply add a node and expand a cluster so that you can scale out on your containerization.

The initial setup for this solution is straightforward and very self-intuitive.

This is an open-source solution, so there are no licensing costs involved.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

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. 

Neutral

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. 

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.

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.