Apache HTTP Server vs. Flutter by Google

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Apache HTTP Server
Score 9.1 out of 10
N/A
Apache Web Server (Apache HTTP Server) is an open source HTTP web server for modern operating systems including UNIX and Windows.N/A
Flutter
Score 8.6 out of 10
N/A
Flutter is an open-source mobile application development framework created by Google. It is used to develop applications for Android and iOS, as well as being the primary method of creating applications for Google Fuchsia.
$0
Pricing
Apache HTTP ServerFlutter by Google
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Apache HTTP ServerFlutter
Free Trial
NoNo
Free/Freemium Version
NoYes
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Apache HTTP ServerFlutter by Google
Best Alternatives
Apache HTTP ServerFlutter by Google
Small Businesses
NGINX
NGINX
Score 9.2 out of 10
Swiftify
Swiftify
Score 9.0 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
NGINX
NGINX
Score 9.2 out of 10
Swiftify
Swiftify
Score 9.0 out of 10
Enterprises
NGINX
NGINX
Score 9.2 out of 10
Swiftify
Swiftify
Score 9.0 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
Apache HTTP ServerFlutter by Google
Likelihood to Recommend
8.0
(20 ratings)
7.9
(17 ratings)
Support Rating
9.3
(2 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
Apache HTTP ServerFlutter by Google
Likelihood to Recommend
Apache
As I mentioned earlier, the Apache HTTP Server has a small disadvantage compared to the competition (NGINX) in terms of performance. If you run websites that really have a lot of visitors, NGINX might be the better alternative.
On the other hand, the Apache HTTP Server is open source and free. Further functionalities can be activated via modules. The documentation is really excellent.
Read full review
Google
Flutter by Google is well suited where you have to make an app across multiple platforms like iOS, Android, Web, Desktop and you don't have the bandwidth to create multiple teams for the Native app. This makes sure you have a faster development and you don't have to worry about how your product will look across different platforms. It is also very smooth/fast in response, making it close to feel like a Native app, this makes it an easy pick for a Fintech product where speed matters. Flutter by Google also has a huge library of Components, which are well tested and developed by Google's Flutter by Google team itself, making the development even more fast since the majority of required components are already available.
Read full review
Pros
Apache
  • Street Cred: Apache Web Server is the Founder for all of Apache Foundation's other projects. Without the Web Server, Apache Foundation would look very different. That being said, they have done a good job of maintaining the code base, and keeping a lot of what makes Apache so special
  • Stability: Apache is rock-solid. While no software is perfect, Apache can parse your web sources quickly and cleanly.
  • Flexibility: Need to startup your own Webpage? Done. Wordpress? Yup. REST Endpoint? Check. Honeypot? Absolutely.
Read full review
Google
  • User interface design works great across all platforms, including native styling for iOS/macOS.
  • Native compilation for mobile platforms and a decent rendering engine results in slick apps that can make the most of your device.
  • Dart is a well thought out language and easy to pick up.
  • Makes cross-platform development of good looking GUI apps a doddle.
Read full review
Cons
Apache
  • The default configurations which comes with Apache server needs to get optimized for performance and security with every new installation as these defaults are not recommended to push on the production environment directly.
  • Security options and advanced configurations are not easy to set up and require an additional level of expertise.
  • Admin frontend GUI could be improved to a great extent to match with other enterprise tools available to serve similar requirements.
Read full review
Google
  • Occasionally updates to the Flutter SDK result in wide-sweeping changes that seem to not be thoroughly tested and considered. Flutter sometimes evolves too fast for its own good.
  • While the 3rd-party Flutter package ecosystem is vast and rich, 1st-party support for basic things (audio/video playback, battery information, Bluetooth services, etc.) are lacking. You are occasionally forced to rely on an open-source package for use-cases that other platforms have native support for.
  • Documentation, particularly around testing, is lacking. While there are some great docs, like the Dart Style Guide, many Flutter-focused support documents are lacking in quality and real-world usability.
  • Flutter allows you to architect an app however you want. While this is a great feature, it also adds complexity and leads to the current state of Flutter's state management, where there are 50+ options on how to organize your app, with very little official guidance or recommendations from the Flutter team. For a beginner, this can create decision paralysis.
Read full review
Usability
Apache
No answers on this topic
Google
Flutter by Google is very easy to start with. The initial setup they provide is very helpful and easy to understand. The default project setup is also good and can be deployed to production without changing much. Flutter by Google provides a huge library of components, which are created and tested by their own team, making the development of application much faster and robust. Flutter by Google also has a huge community support where we can find components built by the community and we can contribute our own components as well, which helps in faster dev time. Applications developed using Flutter by Google are very smooth, almost feels like native, which helps in creating good impression on customers/clients.
Read full review
Support Rating
Apache
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.
Read full review
Google
No answers on this topic
Alternatives Considered
Apache
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 Apache it is.
Read full review
Google
I have experience with react and React Native. I would say that the idea behind all those frameworks are quite similar. However, I found the javascript-based frameworks a bit more accessible as you could utilise your javascript knowledge. Here, Flutter works with its own language. This has advantages and disadvantages sometimes. I found the community around javascript frameworks bigger and therefore sometimes more helpful. However, Flutter does a good job here as well. I think the main argument for Flutter is its usability for less experienced developers. If you do not have knowledge in javascript or other programming languages then I think it is much easier to start with Flutter than with another framework like react. I think the package that you get form scratch is better than in the other frameworks were you have to set up and learn a lot more before you can start.
Read full review
Return on Investment
Apache
  • Works as intended, so it's less to worry about.
  • Works great on elastic environments (like EC2).
  • As an Open Source project, you can get support for almost any problem you can have.
  • Configuration files, while powerful, can be tricky to dominate for some.
Read full review
Google
  • The rapid development capabilities of Flutter allow us to build apps we could not have previously considered commercially viable, opening new revenue streams.
  • Free and open licensing made adoption very easy (ie. free/low cost!).
  • In comparison to Qt, our time spent arguing with build tools and perfecting development environments has decreased substantially.
Read full review
ScreenShots