cPanel headquartered in Houston provides website hosting providers with workload and server automation, as well as a management console for creating and launching websites, managing email and web files, and other administrative tasks.
$15.99
per month for 1 account
Microsoft IIS
Score 8.5 out of 10
N/A
Microsoft IIS is an application server and infrastructure.
Really there aren't many options. There is a free one that I haven't used but from what I hear is that it is very limited on functionality. I also have tried Plesk, never bought but tried it. It seemed easier in a few things but also seemed more simplistic and I like my …
I have used cPanel for a long time along with a few other hosting management platforms. cPanel from a feature and speed standpoint outranks the competition.
cPanel interface is not as appealing and straightforward as other hosting solutions, but it offers more features and is certainly more flexible in that regard.
cPanel is my least favorite option compared to others like Plesk and custom solutions developed by other companies such as Kinsta. However, my preference is towards serverless website builds but when a traditional server is required I prefer to directly manage it or use …
cPanel offers a more friendly to beginners experience compared to Ajenti. The latter is feature rich but you will need more technical know how to navigate. cPanel is more accessible and universal and for those reasons a great solution for my business needs. cPanel works best …
The direct server management tool access provided by cPanel hosting accounts is far superior to any shared or "standard" web site hosting packaged offered by any of the numerous web host providers I have used and or evaluated over the 20+ years of my experience working in the …
cPanel ease of use has by far surpassed other control panels such as Plesk and Webmin. It’s easy to understand. Easy to implement. And always functions correctly. Software support is great and they are always prompt in acknowledging and issues. Also online documentation is …
A long time ago we used HSphere, but development stopped when they were acquired. We had to find something else. We tried Plesk, but it was a nightmare. When we looked we wanted something kind of fault tolerant. cPanel is so easy to move and backup, if a server does go down, we …
cPanel is more user-friendly than many third-party website hosting interfaces, including Godaddy, Bluehost, and 1&1 Host. cPanel is the industry standard, and integrates well with common website software and third-party modules. Managing your website is effortless in cPanel, …
The typical alternative to cPanel when purchasing a hosting control panel option is Plesk. I have very little experience with Plesk, but there are different versions of it available depending on the features you need. The Webhost Edition, which seems to be most comparable to …
cPanel has a better interface than Webmin in my opinion, better themes, and better out-of-the-box support for other systems/platforms for hosting and integrations. It is also easier to create and control Apache configurations, and there is a wider selection of 3rd-party …
On Windows, Microsoft IIS is easier to implement and maintain than Apache web service. Normally if you need to host PHP or other apache native content on a Windows server, it's recommended to use WAMP or equivalent software to simplify the installation, administration, and …
It's difficult to compare Apache HTTP Server, nginx, and IIS - they really serve a similar purpose on a different stack. IIS is well suited to the Microsoft stack. Apache HTTP Server works well for Java web applications. nginx is a multipurpose tool that we sometimes deploy …
Director, eCommerce Analytics and Digital Marketing
Chose Microsoft IIS
In terms of the configuration on a shared volume perspective, I think the Apache HTTP Server does a better job here. The Apache angle on this problem is more efficient from a man power perspective and ends up costing a little less in the long run over time. IIS tends to scale …
Microsoft IIS is a lot more easier for Microsoft .NET developers to integrate and configure. It is MUCH more easier to install and therefore less time consuming to deliver applications to end users. IIS can be installed with a few clicks of a button by anyone with …
After using both Microsoft IIS and free Linux alternatives, like NGINX and Apache, I have to say I much prefer the Linux products in every way. Configuration is clearer (you have to edit config files deep in Linux somewhere, but once you've done it once, it's easy). Logging is …
Microsoft IIS is more simple to configure and also to maintain against other solutions. Often IIS help me to troubleshoot with its administartive tool.
Apache is java. Java is unnecessary complex. No developer wants to invest in learning all the hundreds of text based configuration files to get something done. Also, apache gives you the most evil and un-usable user interface possible. [Microsoft] IIS makes [life] after …
Positive: Better integration with Active Directory
Negative: Appache Tomcat is open source and can be deployed on all operating systems including Linux, which allows for easier cross-platform deployments.
I have had a couple of tries at using Apache and Linux as a whole but I guess I am not of the right mindset to get over the learning barrier to make this work.
Microsoft IIS stacked up well with Apache, but since we are a Microsoft shop primarily, we had more resources that were familiar with managing the operating system and the server itself. While there are some benefits to Apache, you can find most of them in Microsoft IIS if you …
Microsoft IIS was selected long ago as it was included with the Windows licensing. As such no new servers or costs were needed to host a site. We now host nearly 4,000 sites on Microsoft IIS. We do still use other platforms as needed but we always start with Microsoft IIS …
Nginx is hard to support for smaller multiple projects, which is one reason we use the Microsoft IIS server, which is best fit for a set-up once and forget scenario. The Apache server is more recommended for smaller sized projects due to its cost factor, as the Microsoft IIS …
IIS is easier to configure and manage. Doesn't require deep knowledge of the product to manage it. Doesn't require for IT team to learn Linux/Unix OS for basic web hosting. However, for advanced IT specialists, all three solutions could be useful and can work together.
Apache and Nginx are both lower overhead solutions compared to IIS, but require extensive configuration through files or command lines. For someone creating a website for the first time, these solutions are difficult to understand and implement.
IIS much easier to install, configure and maintain in a Windows environment. Tomcat is more appropriate when it comes bundled with third party applications.
Apache and Nginx are what we use for our large websites and public data. When dealing with the type of traffic we see on our sites IIS just doesn't scale out well. For our staff levels, Apache and Nginx are very hard to support for all of our projects so we can't always use …
Many support teams are not comfortable supporting Linux platforms which is where Apache can really shine; also, application vendors often do not support Apache on Linux whereas they do support their products on Microsoft servers running IIS. In our case, the applications that I …
I feel each has their own strengths, when it came to developing the in house applications ASP gave us more features so we went with IIS to support those features.
IIS is a different animal than most webservers. I don't know that I'd compare IIS to other products. The differences and reasons to use each are so diverse.
In my experience, Microsoft IIS was definitely easier to wrap my head around and also to troubleshoot. The GUI was a great visual way to see what "sites" and "app pools" you have, what is running, what is currently up.
Microsoft IIS also offers the flexibility to have multiple …
Microsoft IIS is the only official way to run ASP.NET framework sites and for Microsoft System management tools (SCCM and WSUS). While open source options like Apache and NGINX are more commonly used in our department, to maintain the best compatibility we use IIS in certain …
I would recommend cPanel as it is a good tool for a medium-sized business. The licensing costs can be a bit high but you mostly get what you pay for. If you have a bit more of a large or complex web site/structure, there is a bit of a learning curve for administrators. Once you know what you're doing, it does what it does very well.
IIS as a web application server is perfectly suited for .net, .net core, asp.net applications. Our core ESB runs on IIS and has hundreds of gigabytes of data moved through it every day spread across millions of transactions. We have other mission critical applications that deliver our results to patients and doctors relying on IIS web application servers. If you stay in the Microsoft development stack, IIS is a top tier, efficient, and reliable web server.
A big advantage that we use all the time is reviewing the logs that automatically get generated in IIS. It has helped us troubleshoot various problems in our applications over the years.
IIS integrates really well with Visual Studio and TFS. We are able to quickly deploy new applications and changes to applications when requested by the business.
IIS has proven that it is easy to configure and maintain with minimal effort.
The costs can be a limiting factor for some businesses if you are not using a web hosting company that uses it. I have been experimenting with Cloud hosting, which can be very daunting for the novice. There is an option to install it on the cloud but it is expensive.
We have no intention to replace all applications running on top of the IIS platform. Not all applications support other platforms and not all support staff are skilled in Linux/Apache platform support. Whereas IIS may not be the best performing or most secure web platform available, for the aforementioned reasons, it is impossible not to continue use of this product.
Although it can be a little bit bloated with a lot of options and configurations, it's very straightforward to use and maintain. So it's a great option even if you don't have large experience in hosting configuration. The WHM tool is more suited to heavy users since it requires more expertise, so it has a steep learning curve to better understand how to use it.
In general, Microsoft IIS is an alright product. It comes natively with Windows Server. It has good enough GUI to set things up & tweak things around. Once properly setup, it runs stably enough. And with enough Powershell magic, having a CI/CD pipeline to automatically deploy a new version of the application is doable.
ARR (application request routing) in Microsoft IIS Server enables the web-admins to increase the web app reliability and availability through the rule based routing and load balancing of HTTP requests which in turn provides highly available server. IIS 7.0 Manager also provides kernel as well as user mode caching for faster performance and in case if the server fails, the IIS server has good amount of details logged in its log files which help understand and debug the cause quickly. Load balancing facilitates IIS server to fight against availability issues.
In my experience, I have never had significant issues with IIS performance. Sometimes I've experienced issues with loading time, but it is mostly related to the web site code. However Amazon, Microsoft and Google providing free cloud services with very limited resources, and in that scenario, "heavy" websites on IIS could be the issue. In other situations - performance is good.
The documentation available for all cPanel features and functionality is vast, comprehensive, and covers all the basics required to manage the web site hosting environment. User support forums are very helpful, and are packed with years of content and comments answering any questions or answers I have ever had. When needed, direct customer support has been quick and efficient.
As mentioned earlier there is so much documentation or guides or stack overflow questions out there that someone will have faced the same or very similar scenario to what you are going through that you will almost certainly find a solution to what you are after.
Really there aren't many options. There is a free one that I haven't used but from what I hear is that it is very limited on functionality. I also have tried Plesk, never bought but tried it. It seemed easier in a few things but also seemed more simplistic and I like my workflow with cPanel better and it works well with litespeed server.
On Windows, Microsoft IIS is easier to implement and maintain than Apache web service. Normally if you need to host PHP or other apache native content on a Windows server, it's recommended to use WAMP or equivalent software to simplify the installation, administration, and configuration of resources. However, you can use Microsoft IIS and other web services on the same server, taking care to keep separate folders and port usage for each system.
Microsoft IIS Server is scalable if the underlying server configuration is done correctly. Use x64 edition v/s 32bit and using 32bit mode application pools are some of the tweaks to be done to make the IIS server scalable. There are too many small configurations need to be carried out in order to make a highly scalable IIS server hence not giving full score in this area.
Speed of development. You don't need to be an expert to expose your website through some DNS
Robust, there has never been any downtime because of IIS itself.
The ease of use can have (and has had) some negative impact because it's too easy to implement something, and then forget. When a server is taken down, those unthoughtful implementations come to light the hard way.