An objective contrast between Apache and IIS (no more than I don't know, a fright)

Apache vs. IIS pros and cons

For small and medium-sized enterprises to establish their own website, the external display of their own page is the most common thing. At present, the most popular set up WWW service tools will belong to Apache and IIS. So what's the difference between them? which tool is best for us? Let's talk about the problem today.

One, free and charge of the dispute:

Although many users use IIS to build Web sites, they are components that are integrated into the Windows operating system. However, to legally use IIS, you will need to purchase a genuine Windows operating system.

In view of Apache, he is completely free. It is free to download and use without paying any fees.

Conclusion--apache free, IIS charges, the former accounted for excellent.

Second, Stability:

The next thing to compare is stability, WWW service to work at any time normal, a website also need 24 hours a day, seven days a week for the public open. So stability is the focus of comparison between IIS and Apache.

IIS often has 500 errors in actual use, and sometimes there is a strange phenomenon of suspended animation. Users need to restart the IIS service on an irregular basis to ensure that the site is normal.

Apache is more complex to configure than IIS, but it can work long-term once it's set up. Large Web sites use Apache as their own WWW service provider. All Apache configuration is saved in the configuration file and is executed exactly as it was logged in the configuration file. In general, there will be no unexplained suspended animation situation.

Tip: Using IIS under the WINDOWS2003 system is better than Apache performance.

Conclusion--apache stability, IIS sometimes suspended animation, the former accounted for excellent.

Third, the expansion of:

Extensibility refers to whether the WWW service provider can be applied to a variety of situations, multiple network situations, and multiple operating systems.

IIS can only be used under Microsoft's Windows operating system, leaving windows he will accomplish nothing. Cannot be ported to other types of operating systems.

Apache is an all-rounder, he is not only used in Windows, for Unix,linux and FreeBSD and many other operating systems, he can be competent to work. And the configuration steps of different operating systems are basically similar, portability is very high.

Conclusion--iis can only run under Windows, Apache has a wide range of applications. Apache wins.

Iv. Security:

Often see such a site is hacked or a site by an illegal user upload virus message, for others to provide services for the site, security is the most important. If a website has no guarantee of its own security, who would like to browse and use it?

Early IIS had a big problem with security, and hackers could easily swoop in if the default settings were used. In IIS6, however, Microsoft has made significant improvements in its security. As long as the operating system Patches update timely, you can improve the safety of the site as much as possible. In particular, IIS6 and the. NET platform rely on each other to make security almost perfect.

Apache has been doing a good job in security, because many users are using Apache under Linux, so the characteristics of the operating system makes the Apache under Linux has a congenital umbrella, security naturally have no say.

Conclusion--IIS6 Previous versions have security implications, and IIS6 is as safe and reliable as Apache. IIS6 a tie with Apache.

V. Openness:

The so-called openness refers to whether to open the source code of the program, it is well known that IIS is a part of the Windows system, so his source code is not open. And Apache is different, the earliest he is for Unix-like system services, so completely open source code. Anyone can analyze his code, discover the vulnerabilities, and release patches to compensate for the vulnerability.

Because of this openness of Apache, it also makes its security greatly improved.

Conclusion--iis is not open code, Apache open source code. The latter won.

Six, the ease of:

The ease with which a tool is used directly affects how much of its users, especially Web publishing tools. After all, many companies want to have their own website, but do not want to hire a high-paying network administrator to maintain. Therefore, it is necessary to find a relatively easy tool to build their own site.

IIS is easy to open, and it's easy for IIS to work and publish Web sites. However, administrators are prone to misconfiguration and mis-operation issues. But in general IIS is very easy to learn, but it is very difficult to learn him well.

Apache is more difficult to use than IIS and requires people with a certain computer and network Foundation to use. His configuration is not graphical and needs to be done by editing the configuration file. However, from the Apache settings, as long as we strictly follow the Help file for parameter settings, there is no difficulty.

Conclusion--iis is easy to install but difficult to master, Apache installation is relatively difficult, to be proficient is not an easy thing. IIS has a slight advantage.

Copyright NOTICE: This article for Bo Master original article, without Bo Master permission not reproduced.

An objective contrast between Apache and IIS (no more than I don't know, a fright)