Cent os vs. RHEL

[areh]

I have RHLE servers mainly today, and paying fees every year for this. I have run it like this for years, but I still don't know if I really need it. Is RHEL (Enterprice Linux 3/4) much more stable that for instance Cent Os? I do not need support (don't have time to wait for support anyhow..). What do I get to loose?

[rikgarner]

I am perfectly happy with Centos, and have been for some time. AFAIK, all they do is take the RHEL packages, and strip out anything redhat-centric. So long as you only follow the "base" and "update" repo's, they claim 100% binary compatibility with upstream.

So yes, in my opinion, Red Hat subscribers are only paying for the support.

[kris1351]

CentOS is RHEL without the fluff pure and simple. I have been running it on all of our servers since version 3 and had zero issues.

[forlinuxsupport]

I dont really know why you would want to use redhat.

Centos is just as good, because it is basically redhat without the logos

[areh]

Thank you, you have made my decision very easy

[s3bhost.net]

Centos is just as good, I have been running it on all servers .


Regards,
Mohamed