Apache HTTP Server vs. Microsoft IIS

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Apache HTTP Server
Score 8.2 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
Microsoft IIS
Score 8.1 out of 10
N/A
Microsoft IIS is an application server and infrastructure.N/A
Pricing
Apache HTTP ServerMicrosoft IIS
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Apache HTTP ServerMicrosoft IIS
Free Trial
NoNo
Free/Freemium Version
NoNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Apache HTTP ServerMicrosoft IIS
Considered Both Products
Apache HTTP Server
Chose Apache HTTP Server
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 …
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 …
Chose Apache HTTP Server
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 …
Chose Apache HTTP Server
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.
Chose Apache HTTP Server
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 …
Chose Apache HTTP Server
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 …
Chose Apache HTTP Server
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 …
Chose Apache HTTP Server
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 …
Chose Apache HTTP Server
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.
Chose Apache HTTP Server
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.
Chose Apache HTTP Server
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 …
Microsoft IIS
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 …
Chose Microsoft IIS
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 …
Chose Microsoft IIS
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 …
Chose 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 …
Chose Microsoft IIS
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 …
Chose Microsoft IIS
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 …
Chose 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.
Chose Microsoft IIS
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.
Chose Microsoft IIS
We actually use both platforms in conjunction with each other.
Chose Microsoft IIS
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 …
Chose Microsoft IIS
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.
Chose Microsoft IIS
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.
Chose Microsoft IIS
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 …
Top Pros
Top Cons
Features
Apache HTTP ServerMicrosoft IIS
Application Servers
Comparison of Application Servers features of Product A and Product B
Apache HTTP Server
-
Ratings
Microsoft IIS
7.5
28 Ratings
6% below category average
IDE support00 Ratings8.020 Ratings
Security management00 Ratings7.028 Ratings
Administration and management00 Ratings8.028 Ratings
Application server performance00 Ratings8.028 Ratings
Installation00 Ratings9.028 Ratings
Open-source standards compliance00 Ratings5.017 Ratings
Best Alternatives
Apache HTTP ServerMicrosoft IIS
Small Businesses
NGINX
NGINX
Score 9.1 out of 10
NGINX
NGINX
Score 9.1 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
NGINX
NGINX
Score 9.1 out of 10
NGINX
NGINX
Score 9.1 out of 10
Enterprises
NGINX
NGINX
Score 9.1 out of 10
NGINX
NGINX
Score 9.1 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
Apache HTTP ServerMicrosoft IIS
Likelihood to Recommend
8.0
(20 ratings)
9.0
(28 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
-
(0 ratings)
10.0
(1 ratings)
Usability
-
(0 ratings)
10.0
(9 ratings)
Availability
-
(0 ratings)
8.0
(1 ratings)
Performance
-
(0 ratings)
7.8
(2 ratings)
Support Rating
9.3
(2 ratings)
9.4
(6 ratings)
Ease of integration
-
(0 ratings)
8.2
(2 ratings)
Product Scalability
-
(0 ratings)
8.0
(1 ratings)
User Testimonials
Apache HTTP ServerMicrosoft IIS
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
Microsoft
Publishing applications or websites is easy with Microsoft IIS. You don't need external software or complicated tutorials involving command lines and editing configuration files. On other hand, sometimes the troubleshooter needs a high knowledge of Windows Server, Registry, and tools to debug the application. If you need to host non-Microsoft technology as PHP pages or have a low budget, I recommend IIS equivalent software as Apache.
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
Microsoft
  • 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.
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
Microsoft
  • Angular/node apps don't run on IIS, or at least we never figured out how. Rather we ended up using nginx.
  • There are still occasional memory leaks - check your recycle settings!
  • If you have very heavy usage for web APIs, IIS requires regular restarts for reasons unknown.
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
Apache
No answers on this topic
Microsoft
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.
Read full review
Usability
Apache
No answers on this topic
Microsoft
As I've mentioned earlier, Microsoft IIS is very simple and easy to use. The user interface is a little bit overloaded with a huge number of different options, but once you have a little clue of what you are doing and what you need - no issues at all.
Read full review
Reliability and Availability
Apache
No answers on this topic
Microsoft
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.
Read full review
Performance
Apache
No answers on this topic
Microsoft
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.
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
Microsoft
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.
Read full review
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
Microsoft
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 development easy, which is already complex enough to be bothered by something as mundane as exposing your work over the internet.
Read full review
Scalability
Apache
No answers on this topic
Microsoft
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.
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
Microsoft
  • Allowing us to internally host our monitoring websites allows quick access to data that can be quite hidden, saving developer time.
  • It was inexpensive compared to more bulky solutions saving upfront cost.
  • It’s easy to install and enable allowing more developer savings.
Read full review
ScreenShots