Comments on: Decision Time: CentOS vs. Redhat

By: TerabyteHosting

TerabyteHosting — Fri, 08 Jan 2010 00:05:19 +0000

Informative – nicely written and structured. I always considered this to be the exact difference, and that is the cost factor. I too, have RH Certs, and work as a Sys Admin, on a conglomerate of OS’s, I choose CentOS, because by far, hands down (IMHO), its the greatest supported release available. and yes, I have used other releases.

Regards,
DosDawg

By: Greg

Greg — Fri, 09 Oct 2009 18:44:40 +0000

Edward, I don’t think “knock off” is a good term for CentOS, if you took a Mercedes, removed the logos and replaced them with a generic C for car, it’d still be a mercedes. CentOS is just the same as if you took the trouble to install RedHat then remove all the logos and RedHat specific code.

What I don’t think this article addressed and what I was looking for is a practical judgment of the difference. I myself find that calling RedHat support gets me the answer less often and slower than “Googling” for it, and if it’s a real tough one trolling the forums. We have RedHat support and also use Ubuntu for non production servers, It’s been my experience that my time to resolution is way faster on Ubuntu than RedHat despite the lack of paid for support.

By: custangro

custangro — Sun, 02 Mar 2008 17:00:59 +0000

Fedora is OK but it’s NOT Red Hat. It’s built different. I used CentOS as a learning tool when I was studying for my RCHE…well I passed and now am working as a Sys Admin…with RHEL…I guess CentOS paid off for them there

-C

By: p.e.alvarez

p.e.alvarez — Sat, 01 Dec 2007 01:36:33 +0000

… and reformat and go through dependency hell every 6 months? No thanks.

I’m still using CentOS 4 and like it just fine 1.5 years later thank you very much.

When will I upgrade? I dunno. Don’t care.

By: Andrew

Andrew — Thu, 11 Oct 2007 16:25:04 +0000

Then why not go with Fedora 7 instead?

By: John

John — Wed, 10 Oct 2007 03:01:43 +0000

Thanks for the good article on linux dedicated servers, and centos / cent os.

By: Edward Capriolo

Edward Capriolo — Tue, 29 May 2007 19:45:22 +0000

This article was exactly what I was looking for. It is nice that the article spent some time to clearly define support. I think many people are stuck between Fedora Core / Cent OS / RedHat EL. Everyone wants RedHat EL because no one wants a development branch FC5 or a knock off (Cent OS). However if you can get a knock off (Cent OS) and get the same thing as the original for a better price (free) that is a strong argument for the Knock Off.

By: SingleHop Blog » SingleHop Continues Media Blitz

SingleHop Blog » SingleHop Continues Media Blitz — Tue, 27 Feb 2007 23:32:26 +0000

[...] In addition to the above, John’s article that covered the CentOS vs. RHEL decision was picked up by multiple tech-based reviews and blogs across the web. [...]

By: mookie

mookie — Fri, 02 Feb 2007 20:52:48 +0000

I agree with G. Fernandes. This is just a fluff piece for Single-hop. The difference between CentOS and RHEL doesn’t need a whole write up like above. It goes like this:

CentOS is built from the same sources as RHEL, the difference is that CentOS does not have paid support behind it.

Btw, you can use up2date with CentOS also, it is just faster to use the command-line yum tool.

By: Marty

Marty — Fri, 02 Feb 2007 14:30:30 +0000

There is a reason that RHEL and CentOS have the same packages. They are the same product, minus the proprietary Redhat pieces and non GPL pieces that are not legally available for free. CentOS takes the GPL portions and repackages them as CentOS.