Microsoft IIS vs Apache webserver

Forums › IT Pro and developers › Microsoft IIS vs Apache webserver

1 | 2

TwoSeven

1712 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 304

Subscriber

#980933 5-Feb-2014 19:16

I wonder if they include all of the sites hosted behind corporate firewalls.

Software Engineer
(the practice of real science, engineering and management)
A.I. (Automation rebranded)
Gender Neutral
(a person who believes in equality and who does not believe in/use stereotypes. Examples such as gender, binary, nonbinary, male/female etc.)

...they/their/them...

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
80656 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 41058

Administrator

ID Verified

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#980968 5-Feb-2014 19:55

gzt: I vividly remember on Windows 95 getting IIS going and finding it was limited to serving 10 computers or some other silly limitation. Installing apache on 9x was a genuine OMG moment.

Are you seriously saying your dislike for IIS is because of its performance on Windows 95? You haven't looked at it since then?

Referral links: Quic Broadband (free setup code: R587125ERQ6VE) | Samsung | AliExpress | Wise | Sharesies

Support Geekzone by subscribing (browse ads-free), or making a one-off or recurring donation through PressPatron.

gzt

18685 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 7826

Lifetime subscriber

#980998 5-Feb-2014 20:39

freitasm:
gzt: I vividly remember on Windows 95 getting IIS going and finding it was limited to serving 10 computers or some other silly limitation. Installing apache on 9x was a genuine OMG moment.

Are you seriously saying your dislike for IIS is because of its performance on Windows 95? You haven't looked at it since then?

It was not my intention to express any dislike for IIS. Back then I assumed my platform was unable to handle anything more. The ability to run the same webserver software as the largest sites in the world (OMG!) on that platform was something totally unexpected. Clearly I'm not going to win any clear communication prizes today : ).

nathan

5695 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1630
Inactive user

#981013 5-Feb-2014 21:06

TwoSeven: I wonder if they include all of the sites hosted behind corporate firewalls.

if they are public then yes

methodology
http://www.netcraft.com/active-sites/

Ragnor

8279 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 585

Trusted

#981023 5-Feb-2014 22:01

gzt: I vividly remember on Windows 95 getting IIS going and finding it was limited to serving 10 computers or some other silly limitation. Installing apache on 9x was a genuine OMG moment.

Windows 95 was a desktop OS and shouldn't of had IIS, they gave it a cut down version for web developer convenience during development not to actually host iirc. NT 3 was out before 95 in 1993.

gzt

18685 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 7826

Lifetime subscriber

#981041 5-Feb-2014 22:33

Ragnor:
gzt: I vividly remember on Windows 95 getting IIS going and finding it was limited to serving 10 computers or some other silly limitation. Installing apache on 9x was a genuine OMG moment.

Windows 95 was a desktop OS and shouldn't of had IIS, they gave it a cut down version for web developer convenience during development not to actually host iirc. NT 3 was out before 95 in 1993.

That's correct I think. Similar limitations apply to the IIS available for non-server platforms today also. It's kind of a non-issue and a lot has changed since then. Cheap hosting in any flavor for one.

1 | 2