Apache Web Server (Apache HTTP Server) is an open source HTTP web server for modern operating systems including UNIX and Windows.
N/A
.NET
Score 8.6 out of 10
N/A
Microsoft's .Net is an open source, freeware application infrastructure.
N/A
Pricing
Apache HTTP Server
.NET
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Apache HTTP Server
.NET
Free Trial
No
No
Free/Freemium Version
No
No
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
No setup fee
Additional Details
—
—
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Apache HTTP Server
.NET
Considered Both Products
Apache HTTP Server
Verified User
Anonymous
Chose Apache HTTP Server
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 …
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.
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 …
.NET is equivalent to Java, a byte-code compiled, just-in-time native compiled, garbage collected language and runtime, with performance and features that are basically equivalent. .NET worked for us because it gave us a native-ish Windows user interface, as opposed to the …
Compared to PHP, .Net has a far better-standardized framework from which to pick and choose libraries from. It is also a more mature language, even though PHP has been out a bit longer. The ability to create desktop apps using .Net is another benefit compared to PHP. If a very …
If it was up to me, I'd rather use something like Node.JS hands down. Things are simpler, there is no gigantic convoluted class hierarchy to learn like there is with .NET. Also Node is really fast and lightweight. I find .NET these days to be a totally solid product and it …
.Net is multi-platform and integrates many languages which makes it a one stop universal platform for everything. It further allows for easy collaboration and interfaces with Git for version control. It also has a very elaborate variety of extensions making the possibilities …
Java is confusing sometimes and has poor IDEs. Now it is no more open source, so it does not worth [starting] a project with Java. The new .NET Core is available for Linux and MacOS too, so it would not be a problem to plan a migration. Moreover[,] the performances are really …
I have used Java and .NET seems to be a more solid development ecosystem As time has gone on they have improved their cross-platform capabilities and deeply improved their support for the open-source community.
The .NET platform has a much longer and broader history than Laravel, so we chose to go with it as the support will be far superior. Additionally, Laravel is tied to PHP, while you can use multiple different languages in .NET. The additional flexibility that .NET provides in …
Both Java and .NET are similar. They provide nearly the same capabilities so long as you know how to use the differences in the way they structure in how they handle objects. The benefit to using the .NET framework is the ability to use all of the features of the Visual Studio …
Java vs .NET these days is more of a preference than anything else; you pick and choose whichever works best for you. Both have active and vibrant community support, and both have good development tools to work with. The benefit that .NET has over Java is that you can get …
We are currently moving away from Visual LANSA as it does not do well on the web. Developers are hard to find for this language while .NET developers are readily available and very knowledgeable.
By switching to .NET, our development time has been cut down and has become more …
.Net platform is our primary option for developing newer solutions because of a lot of reasons, but in the past years, we have received a few requests in which we had to use Java SE. We had no big problem to use Java. Still, the productivity difference and the offer of …
We have worked with Java in the past but their library, functions, features out the box are not as helpful as those provided by .NET. Additionally, these features can be harder to implement depending on your business and it's harder to find these skills/resources from the …
Microsoft .NET has been the choice of development here for a long time and was chosen for its portability, ease of development and more. We have been very successful in developing custom applications in Microsoft .NET. This back end of Microsoft .NET applications has made it …
We evaluated Java as a platform for custom development. There were many advantages to using Java like - Java is portable, so you can choose whatever operating system you need to build your app or website. Object-relational support is better, and Java calls the database less …
TFS and GIT used as source control. It really works seamlessly with MS builds, Jenkins, Jfrog and CARA. It provides a complete DevOps process. Splunk and EL are tools used for logging, tracking, and tracing purposes. ServiceNow creates a domain to contain all information and …
There really isn't anything like .NET. I have tried using Eclipse to develop applications in Java, and have tried using Qt Creator to develop C++ applications. I found Microsoft's Visual Studio suites far easier to use.
.NET is built by Microsoft and mainly uses C#. It is great if you work a lot with Windows or Azure. Java runs on the JVM (Java Virtual Machine) and has been around longer. It is known for being reliable and widely used in large systems. Overall .Net works very well for us in a …
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).
If you need to build anything from a quick-and-dirty GUI utility to a full-fledged desktop application, .NET is the way to go. It doesn't require extensive knowledge of the languages as Visual Studio is extremely helpful in its autocomplete, refactoring, and prompts, and lets you build out your solution easily without worrying about the details of [the] setup and boilerplate.
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.
.NET is heavily Microsoft Windows oriented, and while .NET core tried to resolve that with MacOS and Linux support, .NET Core is still waiting for wider adoption.
While free for small projects, additional features for big projects can be a little expensive.
Can be resource-heavy upon deployment. We continuously have our more senior staff optimize the code of our junior developers for performance. Other languages are a little bit more forgiving in comparison.
.NET frameworks are fantastic overall. There are no limitations to what you can accomplish with it. The most important part is that you'll have access to developer community support and that .NET is always being improved every month. Be it in web applications, back-end servers, or integrations, .NET enables developers to do it all.
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.
As Microsoft Gold Partners, we do have access to a lot of additional information and support from Microsoft. Still, the availability of "open and free" documentation, community, and enthusiasts of the platform is vast. Added to that, the quality of resources provided for all the Microsoft ecosystem is very impressive.
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.
If it was up to me, I'd rather use something like Node.js hands down. Things are simpler, there is no gigantic convoluted class hierarchy to learn like there is with .NET. Also Node is really fast and lightweight. I find .NET these days to be a totally solid product and it certainly has its place - but it seems a bit dated and boring to me now.
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 slowly switching from a dying programming language to .NET because it was too expensive to hire developers for the old programming language. There are way more .NET developers around and an amazing community which has allowed us to keep our costs low.
Our development time has been greatly reduced because now we're not developing applications for each OS platform. We do it once and deploy accordingly.
.NET Core has been a big mindshift in terms of how to program. The learning curve has been quite high for existing .NET developers.