[geerlingguy]

The key difference IMO is that CentOS is derived from RHEL, a distro built mainly with server applications in mind (you can tell a lot of things like directory structures and packaging were designed for easier/repeatable/automated configuration), while Ubuntu was (and is still?) primarily targeting UI-based use cases, or more 'end/single-user friendly' use cases.

Case in point, why does MySQL automatically get started (in an insecure state, mind you) when installing from the official repos on Ubuntu? And standard Apache and Nginx configuration patterns (and the changes from 10-12-14.04) sometimes make me want to give up supporting Deb/Ubuntu!

[frik]

RHEL/CentOS and Debian/Ubuntu are all viable server OS. RHEL/CentOS are more common in US. Debian/Ubuntu are very common in Europe, etc. and with cloud instances.

[vacri]

I find the RHEL tooling to be more baroque and arcane than the Debian tooling, and the latter is generally nicer to read output from. Debian isn't primarily targeting UI-based use cases, and Ubuntu inherits its system tooling from them. The arguments of 'it starts automatically' are a RHEL vs Debian debate, not Ubuntu specifically, and I think they're a canard, to be honest. If you're installing a system where a brief window of localhost-only mysql server could be compromised, you're already in an usual position - you're installing a database system on a sever that other, untrusted entities are already using. If you're concerned, you could simply install your pre-seed config file before installing mysql instead of after it, as Debian doesn't overwrite altered config files.

Re: apache: at least apache on deb-based systems keeps the same name everywhere, and you don't have to remember which part of the system calls it httpd and which part calls it apache :)