CentOS and other Linux products have almost the same features, but Fedora Linux, a product that is a more futuristic tool, was a bit buggy. The aforementioned area consists of details on why my company chose to work with CentOS.

There are no cons in CentOS or Red Hat products. The cons are mostly found in Microsoft products.

My organization asked us to identify the possibilities of using Oracle Linux. That's why I am studying options.

I did not personally compare other different solutions. 

There were a few other options, but CentOS is heavily used and that helps.

I sometimes use Ubuntu for network service. The main difference is that if you don't upgrade with Ubuntu, you have to change the source and that can create problems that we don't experience with CentOS.

Because the solution is being depreciated, we are considering moving to Ubuntu but haven't made that decision yet. 

When it comes to Linux, we've tried the Debian route before. Trying both Debian and Ubuntu, we settled on CentOS once we noticed that the enterprise market was going in that direction. It proved to be a wise choice.

I evaluated Red Hat.

We used SLES for a few years on some hosts. We considered Ubuntu LTS, Debian Stable, and FreeBSD.

We evaluated Red Hat Fuse, which is a CentOS variant. We used CentOS as it's free.

We switched from Oracle Linux because the solution is free and now private. 

Ubuntu.

We evaluated Sun and Ubantu.

We evaluated 1U servers, but using the four-server system we save money.

We evaluated Fedora.

We did not evaluate other solutions.

No.