Centos 5.1 Review
CentOS stands for Community ENTerprise Operating System. As a group, CentOS is a community of open source contributors and users. Typical CentOS users are organizations and individuals that do not need strong commercial support in order to achieve successful operation. CentOS is 100% compatible rebuild of the Red Hat Enterprise Linux, in full compliance with Red Hat's redistribution requirements. CentOS is for people who need an enterprise class operating system stability without the cost of certification and support. CentOS is currently ranked #12 at distrowatch
Test Machine
Pentium D 3.4 GHz with 2 gig of RAM, Nvidia 7300GS with 256 meg RAM and 19" wide screen monitor. For this review I am using 64 bit edition.
Booting
The installation DVD does not come with a Live environment. A separate Live CD is available for people interested in checking the environment first.
Fedora and CentOS are amongst the earliest distributions to correctly bring 1440x900@75Hz desktop resolution.
Installation
CentOS uses Anaconda as the system installer. As with the other distributions that use Anaconda; it is really simple to install CentOS without actually burning a DVD. User can install the system from the hard disk containing the ISO image. For detailed description see the installation section in my earlier post.
Anaconda asks for the language, keyboard and allows you to configure partitions. The network configuration tool has been updated and user can separately configure IPv4 and IPv6 addresses. Earlier it was not possible to assign static IP to one and leave the other one on DHCP, but thats not the case now. Anaconda then asks for time zone, root password and the packages to be installed.
User can select additional repositories during package selection, but I did not try that out. The package selection categories made me laugh. Emacs and Editors are different categories :). Seems like Emacs is not an editor any more, but far more better/superior than editors. And even though the fact that Emacs is not in the latest 22 version.
Aesthetics
CentOS comes with a light blue theme and the theme is very well integrated(even with Compiz). The default font set was "Sans" (I personally do not like Sans), which I changed to "Dejavu Sans". For a Sever/Workspace oriented distribution, the look and feel is nice.
Applications
Being a DVD install there are a huge number of applications. I would say that I was really disappointed by version of applications used by CentOS (Red Hat). Firefox is in version 1.5.0.12 and Open Office is in a really old version 2.0.4. But this rant is more appropriate for Red Hat. Pirut is again disappointing as it fails/hangs a lot.
Additional applications can be downloaded from the repository. But the repository seems to be stagnant. There is not even a single application in the main extra repository. Some applications are present in extra testing repository but they are not sufficient. The repository for CentOS 4 is full of all kinds of useful applications.
Multimedia
There is no out-of-box multimedia support in CentOS, and hopelessly the official repository lacks the required binary packages. So if you are looking for multimedia functionality, you have to look of other unofficial repositories or compile the applications/codecs from source.
Eye Candy
Compiz is installed by default and provides basic eye-candy. But for enabling it, proprietary graphics card drivers need to be installed and /etc/X11/xorg.conf needs to be tweaked.
Conclusion
CentOS is just a clone of Red Hat Enterprise Linux, and really a good clone. But it seems to be going into dangerous waters. The most disappointing aspect was the lack of good and complete official repository(which is not the case with CentOS 4). It is a really good distribution for server/workstation users who do not want to pay extortion money to Red Hat. But for casual desktop user, I advise to stay clear.
7 comments :
Mostly people on redhat/centos/etc these days use rpmforge for a repository of applications, 4000+ packages for redhat/centos 5 there.
CentOS Extras in 4 also only came later once the need were clear etc
Edit a *.conf file in Linux, OMG that's obsurd! Haha, you must be one of those "Average Desktop Users" that you mentioned toward the end.
I have the similar experience in Fedora (the repository seems to be stagnant) :-(
"Compiz is installed by default and provides basic eye-candy. But for enabling it, proprietary graphics card drivers need to be installed and /etc/X11/xorg.conf needs to be tweaked."
Basically because Red Hat doesn't want to be bothered by the maintenance nightmare that is proprietary, binary blob drivers!
I personally see that as a good thing, because by doing that they can freely fix a problem with any driver, if there ever is a problem, instead of relying on some vendor to do it. Here's an example of NVIDIA leaving a serious security problem in their driver for two darn years: http://kerneltrap.org/node/7228
Do you really feel safe using garbage like that?
Also, to speak a little from Red Hat's perspective ... they have an ethical commitment to what they do, and that's just it, if that's no good for you, Red Hat or CentOS (Who shares Red Hat's views) you ought to go use SUSE or Ubuntu. Personally ... I like my software solid, and getting security flaws squashed as soon as they are found, and not two years later.
"The most disappointing aspect was the lack of good and complete official repository(which is not the case with CentOS 4)."
A specific and concrete example, would be a lot more useful than a simple complaint.
"It is a really good distribution for server/workstation users who do not want to pay extortion money to Red Hat."
Geee, you're right, Red Hat is definitely the evil mafia-style party going around and demanding "extortion money" from people. You know, you're darn right, wanting money for offering a service to people, is definitely evil! Who are these evil capitalists!!! AND EVEN WORSE, they make sure people can redistribute their stuff, SO THEY'RE COMMUNIST AT THE SAME TIME!!!!! ALL HAIL STEVE BALLMER, AND HIS PATENT "PROTECTION" RACKET!!! /A LOT OF SARCASM
"But for casual desktop user, I advise to stay clear."
Yeah, because being forced to pay a patent royalty (More like "extortion license") is definitely better than installing a little bit of extra software, oh but that's completely unheard of on all other platforms ... oh expect for the fact that I can't play my Matroska encoded videos on any version of Windows out of the box ...
I have tried Suse 10.3, Ubuntu 7.10, CentOS 5.1, PCLinuxOS, and Kubuntu. I chose CentOS 5.1 because it IS Red Hat minus the logo, it has the better performance on the given two machines I had, it was easy to theme (go to Gnome Look.org), and it was the most responsive (best performance). To all Linux newbs like me, the main key think to learn or know is the 5-8 basic commands for the distro you choose AND the best software respositories to get the software you wish. I personally like a very nice looking themed desktop, fastest performing, and easy to work with - hence CentOS 5.1. Although I am a Linux beginner (1 month total experience; almost 1 week each distribution), Red Hat closed CentOS really fits the bill for a workstation - great for SOHO or Corporate clients. This review is a joke because it is so bare - not enough facts to fully support findings - try it yourself. Make sure to enhance your desktop from GnomeLook!
You dissed my favorite distro!
CentOS 5 is such a big improvement over version 4 that I suggest to anyone that wants off of the upgrade treadmill to try it. Yes, there is now an alternative to Fedora.
Legacy compatibility is all there: I can run binaries compiled on my old 486 RH6.2; I can compile old SRPMs by modifying the spec file "export CC=gcc32" and "rpmbuild -ba --define 'dist .el5' --target i686 foo.spec" and even get a new .el5.src.rpm in the process. There is NO lack of software because CentOS=RedHat=Fedora therefore you can install the rpm binaries.
I can finally make the final tweaks to my completely personalized system and be done.
Now to debunk some junk...
{
Applications
...I was really disappointed by version of applications used by CentOS (Red Hat). Firefox is in version 1.5.0.12 and Open Office is in a really old version 2.0.4. But this rant is more appropriate for Red Hat. Pirut is again disappointing as it fails/hangs a lot.
}
These applications work reasonably well. I like SeaMonkey rather than Firefox so I installed
it and integrated it into my desktop: System>Preferences>More Preferences>Preferred Applications:SeaMonkey
{
Additional applications ... But the repository seems to be stagnant. There is not even a single application in the main extra repository. ...not sufficient.
}
I covered this in my intro (also try the Dribble repository)
{
The repository for CentOS 4 is full of all kinds of useful applications.
}
Install the CentOS 4 binaries or compile the source rpms
{
Multimedia
There is no out-of-box multimedia support in CentOS, and hopelessly the official repository lacks the required binary packages. So if you are looking for multimedia functionality, you have to look of other unofficial repositories or compile the applications/codecs from source.
}
Get Linspire if you are weak. But, my CentOS box Hovers with Multimedia capability. You show me something, and I will show you one better.
{
Eye Candy
Compiz is installed by default and provides basic eye-candy. But for enabling it, proprietary graphics card drivers need to be installed and /etc/X11/xorg.conf needs to be tweaked.
}
Compiz works really good on my old 1GHz Pentium 3 with 32MB radeon All in Wonder (open source 2d accelerated radeon.o driver). Yes I tweaked xorg.conf with: Option "GARTSize" "64"
{
Conclusion
CentOS is just a clone of Red Hat Enterprise Linux, and really a good clone. But it seems to be going into dangerous waters. The most disappointing aspect was the lack of good and complete official repository(which is not the case with CentOS 4). It is a really good distribution for server/workstation users who do not want to pay extortion money to Red Hat. But for casual desktop user, I advise to stay clear.
}
Thats just pure hate. Read the Conclusion again and it will make even less sense. Yes, read it again.
This review is full of crap ... Almost 0 facts ( no apps .. proprietary drivers needed .. compile codecs etc ) No understanding of the server/workstation/desktop market and its written really badly ... me think u better stick to Vista "Ultimate" ( lol.. im sorry that always makes me laugh ) .peace
Post a Comment