CentOS Linux is a Linux distribution is an enterprise OS platform compatible with its source RedHat Enterprise Linux (RHEL). Its end of life was announced for December 2021.
N/A
CentOS Stream
Score 7.0 out of 10
N/A
CentOS Stream is a continuously delivered distro that tracks just ahead of Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) development, positioned as a midstream between Fedora Linux and RHEL. Upon the announcement of CentOS Linux's EOL date set for December 2021, the focus of the CentOS Project is now CentOS Stream.
N/A
Cisco Meraki MX
Score 9.0 out of 10
N/A
Cisco Meraki MX Firewalls is a combined UTM and Software-Defined WAN solution. Meraki is managed via the cloud, and provides core firewall services, including site-to-site VPN, plus network monitoring.
The first reason for going CentOS Linux it's because is free, you there's no cost since we deploy a lot of machines in a daily basis. It is a very stable software, we are sure the OS will not crash or restart, so our software can run without issue. The support and …
As it’s only for smaller clients and it’s best suited for our organisation and also it’s reliable. The patching cycle is okay and the applications need not be updated regularly so the downtime will be reduced hence it’s recommended for smaller clients as it’s less costly when …
Ubuntu linux is another candidate that we've evaluated. It stacks up well against CentOS Linux, however it does have some quirks we need to deal with such as package management and stability. For the most part, the server version of Ubuntu is stable, but we stick with CentOS …
Ubuntu Linux LTS used to be a more bleeding edge and did not provide the reliability and stability compared to CentOS, but with the move to CentOS Stream. This is reversed and we're considering moving to Ubuntu even though that is a lot of work. We simply can't work with CentOS …
CentOS is based on RHEL, so it really came down to the costs when making the selection between our options. RHEL offered more support and features, but nothing that we specifically needed. CentOS is fully customizable, something Windows Server was also lacking in many ways. The …
CentOS has a better reputation than Ubuntu Server. In the past some of the packages were quite old compared to Ubuntu Server. CentOS 7 had longer support cycle than the 4 year Ubuntu LTS. And CentOS Stream promises even longer support. It is harder to manage than Ubuntu Server, …
Long ago we used to run Red Hat ES. However, the management of the licenses and stupid dashboards just killed us. Too much time was wasted on worthless administration. Support was not good either. Now I used SUSE way back in the 2000's and it was ok. About two years ago I tried …
For our development environment, we evaluated CentOS against Ubuntu and SLES, and actually did not end up picking CentOS, as our developers found it primitive compared to the niceties offered out of the box from Ubuntu. In addition, our developers found that Ubuntu had an …
When the rubber meets the road, any Linux distribution will do. However, RHEL and distributions that are derived from RHEL have a fantastic ecosystem of users, software packages, and documentation (which is generally compatible between RHEL-derived distributions) that make it …
I like CentOS over other flavors of Linux - mainly because it's widely used, supported, and it's based of RedHat Enterprise Linux. Comparing it to Windows as a server? No comparison - CentOS all the way - unless you want to reboot your windows servers every few days.
We also use Ubuntu or Debian. They have their differences but it mainly comes down to what the software "officially" supports. You can get it to run on either but if there are scripts or packages already built it just saves time.
CentOs is the standard in the hosting industry when it comes to different versions of Linux OSs, it's almost an exact clone of Redhat so it fits in with every need pretty well as well as it being free to use as it is opensource. Ubuntu is a great desktop OS.
Comparing to Ubuntu Server OS, CentOS is better from the security hardening side. RHEL: from my hands-on experience it is pretty much the same as CentOS, but in lots of cases, costs money. However, RHEL has better internal, community and software vendors support. Windows …
Ubuntu Server has a lot of the same pros as CentOS, it can sometimes take a little more work to get the same level of security that you can get out of the box with CentOS. However, Ubuntu has a much better desktop than CentOS. Windows Servers is also reliable and secure well …
I am currently looking into Ubuntu Web Server. I believe I have 18.04 installed on my test lab. I have been trying to compare speeds and reliability to our CentOS Server. The hard part for me is finding a decent web panel to use. CentOS Web Panel is really nice and I have not …
While Ubuntu Server has a lot of the same pros as CentOS, it can sometimes take a little more work to get the same level of hardening that you can get out of the box with CentOS. However, Ubuntu offers a much better desktop experience than CentOS.
CentOS is different than other Linux distributions because it is as close to Red Hat Enterprise Linux as you can get without incurring the costs of Red Hat licensing. Most enterprises accept Red Hat and CentOS as a standard operating system. Some of the other distributions do …
CentOS is a derivative distribution, or rather cloned, of Red Hat Enterprise Linux, which allows 100% compatibility with the binaries of the applications developed for RHEL. For this reason, and being "backed" by such an important company as Red Hat, it is one of the most used …
It is more robust and easy to use, troubleshooting tips can be found online. You can also get community help as well. It is prone to security as compared to other OS. Updates are downloaded and installed in which an admin user can see the progress via the Command line interface.
The MX is useful for small-medium deployments and for easy, non complex deployments. Catalyst SD-WAN is useful for any size and any type of deployments. It is a lot more flexible
As previously mentioned we needed to manually configure each one which would take 15-20 minutes per device and needed to be done on-site. These devices can also go down more frequently after power outages and other incidents, and we've seen them not come back …
Full Meraki stack guarantees perfect interoperability and reduces integration issues. We migrated from competitor products in the past and interoperability was a constant challenge. Being able to standardize configurations across the deployment is extremely valuable and cost …
Main difference is compute / horse power but all the MXs comes with the same feature no matter if we use the smallest appliance or the high end / top of the line model.
Secure firewall provides a more complete featureset but is challenging to adopt and even that product has some weird limitations (like DHCP scope options being global...).
Fortigate also brings a complete set and e have engineers who are skilled at it. The only thing where …
Cisco Meraki is cheaper that other next gen firewall and having almost every feature which is required.Apart from that it is fully cloud managed and others are such that we need to have console access or access through ssh to do any changes required in network.cost is major …
We previously evaluated WatchGuard Firebox Cloud, but we needed a solution that was a bit more straightforward to deploy and manage. The MX met that need for us. However licensing costs for both solutions are still a bit high.
Cisco Meraki MX provides simplicity and scalability while cutting costs. With Meraki MX, you get a Security appliance, router, and Firewall in one appliance and managed with one GUI. These features enable the network engineers to maintain large-scale enterprises with a single …
I have been a CentOS user for over 10 years and remain loyal to the core OS. When it comes to stability and speed, there's no other OS I'd recommend over it. I base this recommendation on my personal experience, as I have multiple development and production servers running the CentOS software today. It's running on newer and older hardware with ease, and the price is right!
The Meraki MX lineup is well suited for organizations that need centralized management of multiple locations, as it allows for both quick deployment and simple/easy remote administration all from a single pane of glass. It also works very well for providing VPN access for remote workers and helps monitor end-device uptime. It does, however, fall a bit short in its firewall's customization, compared to traditional appliances (like our WatchGuard Firebox), so perhaps less suited for organizations that need more customization, as the Meraki MX lineup is primarily designed for simplicity and straightforward cloud-based management.
It's very easy to deploy these devices because it's a cloud-based controlling controller that controls it. So able to, once the device has internet access, all you need to do basically is to look up the controller serial number and it'll basically find it. And once you add it to your network to automatically incorporate that device into your network and basically build the panels for the SD-WAN service.
Some packages can be quite old compared with other distributions
Breaking changes appear often when packages are obsoleted usually with no supported transition path (this is a general *NIX problem, but it's more accentuated in CentOS)
Layer seven firewall rules. Just making them more granular. We've been in meetings with Cisco SES where I've said feature requests many times and that's one of the big ones where it's just a little cumbersome to implement layer seven rules right now.
Just making them more granular. We've been in meetings with Cisco SES where I've said feature requests many times and that's one of the big ones where it's just a little cumbersome to implement layer seven rules right now.
It is already in place and the client is happy with it. We don't see a need to change what is already working. We want the Meraki to stay out of the way and keep things operating, and that's what it does.
It is a very typical server software, so you will have just the console. But it is still very easy to use, you can do anything from there and you have te built in manuals to review any information. For the other hand, if you need a graphical environment is not an issue, you can install any environment you what, Gnome, xfce, etc.
The Cisco Meraki MX series is very easy to use. Setting up user VPN access, site to site VPN to tie multiple locations together and managing all your devices. You can even download the latest firmware and install without ever leaving the dashboard. Meraki is the very definition of easy to use
Meraki MX devices support high availability (HA) configurations, which ensures minimal downtime if one device goes offline. This feature has helped us maintain a stable and reliable network, even in cases of hardware failures. ince Meraki is cloud-managed, we've noticed that the cloud infrastructure is generally highly reliable, with minimal service interruptions or downtime. This makes it easier to manage the network remotely without significant availability concerns. Meraki automatically pushes firmware updates and patches, which helps maintain system stability without requiring manual intervention. These updates are rolled out in a manner that ensures minimal disruption to service.
The interface is pretty responsive. The lower end devices are easy to overwhelm if you have a lot of throughput. Be sure the model you get is rated for the amount of traffic you will have. Overbuild if possible, otherwise you won't be fully leveraging the connection from your ISP.
Again, written documentation is excellent, even on the older versions. The support community is the best. It is comprehensive and I would say that it global because it transcends national boundaries. Also, you find all types of people using CentOS to do all sorts of things so you are bound to find someone to talk to if there are problems.
I haven't ever had a bad experience with Meraki support. On the few occasions where I wasn't understanding the UI or needed some clarification about what a setting actually would do, I contacted them and they were very quickly able to provide help. Returns are simple and fast, too. We had to return a defective device one time and they shipped the replacement before we had even un-racked the one that was faulty. Unlike many other vendors, they didn't ask use to a do long list of scripted diagnostics, they just took my word for it that the device was broken and sent out a replacement immediately
great when they offered it, really tested your knowledge with hands on and see what your peers from other orgs know. glad to see that we were ahead of the curve of what our peers knew
Implementing Meraki MX devices in phases—starting with a pilot group or select branch offices—was invaluable. This allowed us to identify potential configuration issues, troubleshoot problems, and refine our setup before rolling it out company-wide. It also helped to get feedback from early users and adjust the deployment strategy accordingly. The SD-WAN capabilities in Meraki MX were essential for optimizing our WAN traffic and ensuring better application performance across various locations.
Ubuntu Linux is another candidate that we've evaluated. It stacks up well against CentOS Linux, however it does have some quirks we need to deal with such as package management and stability. For the most part, the server version of Ubuntu is stable, but we stick with CentOS Linux because it seems to have a slight edge over Ubuntu in that realm as well. I have colleagues at other firms that are wholesale Ubuntu server infrastructure, and they are very happy with it and Ubuntu is favorable there. With the changes that have occurred or may still yet occur at CentOS Linux, we may go down the path towards Ubuntu. But for now, CentOS Linux is where we are parked and will remain for the foreseeable future.
Cisco CVO (MEVO) As previously mentioned we needed to manually configure each one which would take 15-20 minutes per device and needed to be done on-site. These devices can also go down more frequently after power outages and other incidents, and we've seen them not come back online. These devices are also much larger.
When I first started with my company we had various infrastructure and a mix of tech. Since going to Cisco Meraki MX we have noticed better network performance and our new sites are much easier to bring online. Users have noticed an improvement in VPN connection and getting into all our systems.
Since CentOS is free, our developers and engineers can use it without regard for dipping into project budgets.
We can spin up a CentOS VM, use it and then destroy it without having to worry about licensing headaches.
CentOS can run on just about any hardware platform: server, laptop, old hardware, etc. so that makes it less expensive in that we don't have to buy specialized hardware for it.