Apache Web Server (Apache HTTP Server) is an open source HTTP web server for modern operating systems including UNIX and Windows.
N/A
Mirantis Kubernetes Engine
Score 9.4 out of 10
N/A
The Mirantis Kubernetes Engine (formerly Docker Enterprise, acquired by Mirantis in November 2019)aims to let users ship code faster. Mirantis Kubernetes Engine gives users one set of APIs and tools to deploy, manage, and observe secure-by-default, certified, batteries-included Kubernetes clusters on any infrastructure: public cloud, private cloud, or bare metal.
$0
per year
Pricing
Apache HTTP Server
Mirantis Kubernetes Engine
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
Free
$0.00
per year
Basic
$500.00
per year
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Apache HTTP Server
Mirantis Kubernetes Engine
Free Trial
No
Yes
Free/Freemium Version
No
Yes
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
No setup fee
Additional Details
—
These pricing options are compatible with Linux or Windows Server and are per year, per node. The basic version requires maximum online purchase not to exceed 50 nodes. Support/professional services are not included.
Apache HTTP Server has more stability and features than the other products. It is also more secure. Apache HTTP Server has a more developer base so it is easier to find resources on it.
I has a lot more features, except that IIS is more integrated in a Windows environment. But now with .net core also possible from Apache it would work anywhere really. Only in a full Windows environment where full integration is needed I would chose to go for IIS. Otherwise …
IIS has a clear advantage over Apache: Configuration can be done through a convenient visual editor. But, sometimes, IIS can be tricky to use for serving other things than asp.net.
We had bad experiences working at scale with IIS7.5 while serving PHP websites. I know that more …
The comparison with other products from IBM or Oracle is difficult. These are mostly software that has to be paid for. The only fair comparison at eye level is probably the Nginx web server: It is also free and offers even higher performance. In the meantime, there is also a …
Apache is more simple, also it tends to be more stable and it is less complicated to use, comparing with other complex solutions that are difficult to troubleshot. So wherever possible I select Apache HTTP Server for own/enterprise use also advise consumers to select the Apache …
By having a similar purpose, which is to publish and manage access to services, sites, and/or web systems, I have had to implement them to analyze their qualities and virtues, but stability, the power of implementation of different solutions and to be able to expand through own …
Apache lacks the scalability and feature set of NGINX but our team was not only far more experienced with Apache HTTP Server but was relying on tools and frameworks that required Apache HTTP Server. We've recently considered moving to NGINX but the workload to migrate and train …
Oracle WebLogic /Tuxedo is great when you are using it to install Oracle stack on top including other Oracle middleware and applications. Similarly, if you have IBM applications that need to be configured with IBM DB2, IBM WebSphere is better than Apache Web Server. Red Hat …
To be quite honest I often select Apache because it is the world's most commonly used web server and I have been using it for more than 20 years across many organizations. I have never been burned using Apache. Apache rises above IIS in functionality, configurability, and the …
Against Nginx: Mainly- it's been in the field the longest. There's not really a reason to move to Nginx on it's own. Apache has a mountain of documentation and how-tos that extend from the Foundation itself, to Individual Developers, spanning over 20 years, and most of it …
We chose Apache because it handles dynamic content better than Nginx and it's very well supported. Nginx does handle high traffic sites better, but most of our sites do not get thousands of visitors or more a day as we are a small company serving niche markets. It is notable …
Apache Web Server is the oldest among all of these above-mentioned web server solutions provide a wider range of tools and support available which is of great help when creating a web app because less investment of time and money is what contributes to the success of a project …
I have loved Apache and the brief experience I had with IIS wasn't as good. Nginx I have heard good things and though we use it heavily for our servers now without problems, I haven't configured it myself.
Apache is often used in conjunction with Nginx, with Nginx in front of Apache to serve static assets like CSS and JS. Both are easy to configure. IIS is pretty cumbersome and is not as flexible as Apache.
Keep portability. Web Server machine provides an option to the person to complete their own updates along with deploy their unique application. If live mirroring is not used, some users will have to wait for renewed content. More servers equals …
Apache is far superior to Microsoft's IIS. The only reason to consider IIS would be for compatibility with a given software package that is made exclusively for IIS.
Both NGinx and Apache are trying to accomplish the same thing, with the exception that NGinx is a much faster product. It allows for multi-threading which spreads out the traffic around the server. Apache is typically enabled by default and due to the high volume of websites …
I've used Microsoft's IIS and IBM's HTTP server. The major and a clear advantage of Apache web server over these products is that it’s free and has no licensing issues. Being in the industry for quite sometime (oldest web server) a lot of products and customizations have been …
Apache is terrific. Zeus is actually built on Apache and adds a mediocre at best interface to controlling it. IIS is only good on Windows. Netscape servers are probably not even around anymore, but when they were, were the absolute worst. I couldn't move my office off of them …
I didn’t select Mirantis Cloud Native Suite (Docker Enterprise) when I joined this organisation it was already being used here. The one thing I can say about Mirantis Cloud Native Suite (Docker Enterprise) is easy to use and creates a good impact in the businesses. So, I …
So far I haven't used any other containerized product except Docker Enterprise because in terms of community support and tutorial videos, Docker has a better reach than other tools. Docker can be easily set up from local to the cloud without worrying about the flavor of OS …
I have not used any other software as a container management solution. Its containerized apps allow the usage of less memory, thus
they start and shut down very fast. This tool is helping the enterprise
software to work quickly against the changing conditions thus offers great
I have heard about others, but all my professional life I have been using Docker as my primary container and the thing is you just don't need anything else right now. Because Kubernetes supports Docker and Docker is open-source and just very simple to get started with. 10 …
I have used Vagrant for consistent development environments as well. It is a more "heavyweight" solution since it's a complete virtual machine that requires a host like VirtualBox in order to run. With Docker, the container is much more lightweight and just requires the docker …
Junior Systems Administrator | POS Programming Specialist
Chose Mirantis Kubernetes Engine
FreeNAS, I don't wish to bad mouth any product but it appeared that iXsystems just did not want to help their users or attempt to resolve issues. It looks good on paper and it worked well for me for about 4 years until I needed more support and a more complex and bigger …
Docker has become the defacto service, as far as I have seen, to run Linux or other tools on any OS and architecture and get the same output. I have used vagrant in the past, but it was much more complicated to use. Docker is very common among developers, so documentation and …
Dockers isn't a replacement for VMWare or VirtualBox in all cases. It's fundamentally a different way to solve the development problem. We use Docker when we need a lightweight, fast development scaffold. We use other virtualization solutions if we need GUI access or need a …
I would also compare to BSD Jails, LXC, and Solaris Zones, but they weren't listed. One of the first reasons we decided to use Docker over other container applications is because Docker is the default everyone recommends and is easily the most popular. We found Docker to be …
Docker provides less lock in and more portability than Heroku. You can also easily self host or choose a Docker hosting service. Additionally, there is a wide availability of Docker containers where Heroku build packs are somewhat more limited. Heroku offers a more turnkey …
We've used XAMPP, PHPmyAdmin and similar local environments (our app is on PHP).
Because of how easy you can change the configuration of libraries on PHP and versions (which is SO painful on XAMPP or other friendly LAMP local servers) we are using Docker right now. Also, being …
Prior to docker, we had a custom build and deployment system. For local development, we use VirtualBox to host our VMs, while our custom VMs resided directly on the servers. We chose Docker primarily to allow us to get rid of our custom deployment system, both simplifying build …
Docker is great because of how the Docker Runtime works and how it eliminates the need to have the full operating system overhead that you'd find in a virtual machine (VM), keeping things lightweight and compatible regardless of where you go. Having an isolated, full Linux …
For light weight frontends, the Docker Swarm is the easiest to manage. One person can then mange the production environment and at the same time develop new software.
While Ansible and Docker focus on solving two different problems, we were previously using Ansible to ensure that all dependencies were automatically setup on new servers and that proper configuration was applied when new nodes were brought up. With docker, most of these …
While we still use virtual machines [for our Docker servers], we prefer Docker containers for our deployments. It really allows for a simpler infrastructure footprint to manage. For example, instead of managing 30 virtual machines with one or two apps on each VM, we could …
I had to use virtual machines before, the last one was VirtualBox. I was only a user there, I wasn't responsible for the configuration, it was a black box for me. When I had to use Docker for the first time I was a skeptic, but it proved to be easy. I can't really compare the …
Doocker lacks a lot of the scaling, automation, integration of 3rd party tools/solutions, and integration of shared high-performance self-healing storage, solutions like Heketi provide those missing pieces.
Docker runs both locally and on the server, whereas VirtualBox is only used locally to create a development environment. Docker gives us the ability to have the exact same environment both in the cloud and on individual developers' laptops. There are no surprises for the team, …
Vagrant is another software that offers similar [features that] stack to Docker. It offers an isolated container similar to Docker but Docker is lighter weight because it does not have the additional overhead of a VM Container. Docker has a much larger community of developers …
Docker is a different beast in that it is not trying to solve all of your infrastructure problems or most of them, it is simply trying to provide a reliable container serviced based on linux containers in which you can easily and quickly deploy microservices. LXD does provide …
Docker doesn't directly compare to very many other services. It is unique in its field. However, I love how fast Docker services spin up in comparison to VM-based or server-based applications. Docker is being adopted at a fast rate in the industry, so it's great to see Docker …
Before Docker, we were using Chef to manage our deployments. Chef didn't provide the environmental consistency and release confidence we needed. We had a split process between how the build servers, the developers and the deployed environments were managing the software …
Well Suited: Perfect for hosting your own website. And, I don't mean just an individual with a port of MySpace. I mean an industrial strength, commercial grade replacement for Microsoft IIS. If you need a web server that provides a feature-rich environment with support for multiple sites (hosted in the same server), with such features as virtual hosting, and modular feature design, than Apache Web Server is right on the money. Less Well-Suited: Single page, small feature-set websites. Apache is a lot of trouble for developers to set up, just to send/receive JSON strings of a few bytes. You're really better off using something smaller and faster/simpler (lighttpd for example).
Docker is great for when you would want to use a VM for any given application, but don't need the overhead of the whole OS. Docker containers use very little computing resources, boot up very quickly, and are very easy to set up. An instance where Docker may not be appropriate would be for an application that requires good security. If in this situation, a true VM would probably be your best bet.
Apache is Open Source, governed well (the foundation) and probably the most stable computing platform ever.
Apache is probably one of the most customizable and configurable pieces of software that I have ever run across in more than 30 years of development.
If there is something that Apache can not do, then you need to ask yourself; should I be doing that? The point here is that it is a solid solution and seems to only integrate other technologies that are of the highest caliber.
Apache will live forever and you can not go wrong with it.
Docker has a bit of a learning curve, and it takes some time to become familiar with the tooling and syntax. Transitioning an existing architecture to docker can represent a significant investment.
Docker attempts to provide some level of cross-host container orchestration via swarm, but it falls short of third-party solutions like kubernetes.
We occasionally run into stability issues when the docker daemon is subjected to high load (many applications starting/stopping frequently). In these cases, docker hangs and we have to restart or replace the node.
Docker's CLI has a lot of options, and they aren't all intuitive. And there are so many tools in the space (Docker Compose, Docker Swarm, etc) that have their own configuration as well. So while there is a lot to learn, most concepts transfer easily and can be learned once and applied across everything.
I give this rating because there is so much Apache documentation and information on the web that you can literally do anything. This has to do with the fact that there is a huge Open Source community that is beyond mature and perhaps one of the most helpful to be found. The only thing that should hold anyone back from anything is that they can not read. RTFM, my friend. And I must say that the manual is excellent.
The community support for Docker is fantastic. There is almost always an answer for any issue I might encounter day-to-day, either on Stack Overflow, a helpful blog post, or the community Slack workspace. I've never come across a problem that I was unable to solve via some searching around in the community.
The comparison with other products from IBM or Oracle is difficult. These are mostly software that has to be paid for. The only fair comparison at eye level is probably the NGINX web server: It is also free and offers even higher performance. In the meantime, there is also a paid Plus version of NGINX. This has extended support and special functions.
I have not used any other software as a container management solution. Its containerized apps allow the usage of less memory, thus they start and shut down very fast. This tool is helping the enterprise software to work quickly against the changing conditions thus offers great scaling by simultaneously allowing me to meet the demands, which also leads to easy implementation of the strategies.
Apache web server helped us in building client applications without much investment in the underlying server configuration which gives us the ability to start on a new project quickly and upgrade its resources as and when needed.
Using software which is well-supported by a community of open source contributors makes tasks easy and affordable when need help since a couple of minutes on Google saves a couple of dollars every time and you don't need a specialized support person unless there is something significant needing to be changed.
We are able to try things very quickly compared to before. If you need to debug it, changes on X/Y/Z will have an impact on the way your app works, and changing libraries or configurations of the environment easily can improve your development cycles.
In case someone new arrives, the onboarding is pretty easy thanks to Docker. We have tried many configs and images until we reached a point were we have what we want. We don't have to painfully do that again for every new user. We just send him the image.