CentOS Reviews

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.

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.

CentOS is one of the standard platforms we use to perform jobs.

There was a team of 15 people who were using this solution.

In Microsoft Windows, we store the data in a graphical way, but in CentOS we can store the data based on the command. That is the specialty of CentOS.  In Windows, you can store the data in folders, and anyone can still see that data. In CentOS, it's more secure.

I like the command prompt of CentOS. It's very simple. You can share your files based on command prompt.

I would like the integration to be more secure.

I've been using this solution for one year.

It's stable.

It's very scalable. It's open-source.

We're also using Solaris. We're mostly using these for database storage to fix details and manage the organization data.

Installation is simple. It doesn't take much time. It's just a simple operating system.

The price is very good.

Once you buy the license, Linux will provide you with yearly or monthly patches, so your systems will be scalable for a long time. You can decide whether or not you want to install a patch. They're giving patches instead of going for automatic updates because some of the services will not work.

I would rate this solution 10 out of 10.

I would recommend this solution 100% for someone who is working in IT.

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.

We primarily use the solution to build our applications. 

The solution is stable.

The product offers a free community-based version. You can also buy a license if you need to.

The platform already provides pretty great services. I'm not sure if it is missing any features.

The stability could always be improved.

I occasionally use the solution. 

The solution is stable and the performance is good. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

The solution is scalable, however, if you would like to expand, you may need to pay for a business license. 

in terms of administration, 20 to 30 people use the solution.

I've never used technical support. If I need help, I can Google information to help troubleshoot. 

We did not previously use another operating system. 

The solution was very easy to install. The implementation process wasn't a problem at all. 

The deployment was fast. It maybe took one hour. 

I and another engineer handled the implementation together. You need two to three people to deploy the product.

We are using the community version, which is free. 

I'd rate the solution at a seven out of ten. For the most part, it's a good solution. I'd recommend it to others.

We deploy our products onto the solution. We use it as an OS. Our support team deploys it to customers. 

Overall, the solution works well. 

The team is very comfortable using it. 

It is very simple and straightforward to set up.

The solution is stable.

It's open-source.

The solution is easy to troubleshoot.

As a well-known product, it's easy to find people who know the solution well. 

I'm not an expert on the solution. I cannot pinpoint specific issues. 

The solution could be more scalable.

The company has used the solution for more than ten years, and I have used the solution in the company for one year (since I came on board).

The stability is very good. I'd rate it eight or nine out of ten. There are no bugs or glitches. We haven't had any issues. There haven't been any crashes. It doesn't freeze. 

The scalability could be better. It doesn't scale that well. I'd rate the scalability seven or eight out of ten.

We have around 50 people, our support team, using the solution. 

Our support team deploys the solution on the customer side to assist customers, so the amount of usage would depend on the number of customers we have.

We get support from a vendor. It's open source. We can figure out how to troubleshoot on our own. 

I've also used Oracle Linux as well. We put deep packet processing on the Linux solution.

We haven't had issues with the setup. The support team is comfortable handling the setup. 

The deployment isn't too long. I didn't get a sense that the deployment took too long. 

They mostly give you a file, and it's deployed in a single step. It's not a big project.

We have about five people who handle deployment and maintenance. 

The solution is open-source. We do not pay a licensing fee. 

We may be using version nine of the solution. 

This is a very widely known solution that is very stable. It's easy to find engineers comfortable with it since its usage is common. 

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.