What users are saying about

.NET

63 Ratings

Apache Web Server

53 Ratings
<a href='https://www.trustradius.com/static/about-trustradius-scoring' target='_blank' rel='nofollow'>trScore algorithm: Learn more.</a>
Score 8.9 out of 101

.NET

63 Ratings
<a href='https://www.trustradius.com/static/about-trustradius-scoring' target='_blank' rel='nofollow'>trScore algorithm: Learn more.</a>
Score 8.5 out of 101

Add comparison

Likelihood to Recommend

Apache Web Server

Apache is appropriate for every scenario that I can think of, including use on Windows server.
Warren Krysiak profile photo

.NET

Great for both client side, web sites, and server side code. Probably not as efficient as a SPA though.
No photo available

Pros

  • Great handling of virtual hosts.
  • Works extremely well with Perl/CGI and the Mod-Perl module for fast and reliable execution of server side scripts.
  • Handles serving up web pages well, a true no muss, no fuss situation.
No photo available
  • .NET allows the user to quickly create applications to solve problems.
  • .NET is extremely flexible, allowing the programmer to interact with nearly every aspect of the computer.
  • There are a number of languages that can be used to program in .NET.
No photo available

Cons

  • Quicker development of new features.
  • A slim version of Apache would be neat for use in small deployments.
Tyler Longren profile photo
  • Interacting with some of the core functionalities of the computer requires the user to know C++ and program using unmanaged code. However, I don't think this is a limitation that only applies to .NET.
  • .NET has a very powerful feature to allow generic access to objects, known as Language-Integrated Query or LINQ. Knowing how to use this feature is not required to create applications, but makes development much easier. Since it is not required, there is very little motivation to learn how to implement LINQ. It might be beneficial to promote this feature more heavily.
  • It is difficult to find a third area that could be improved with .NET.
No photo available

Alternatives Considered

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.
Warren Krysiak profile photo
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.
No photo available

Return on Investment

  • Best to go for if using war files/folder
  • Portability web server
  • Easy navigation
Hari Kumar profile photo
  • I have not been required to pay for using .NET, so it is not possible to calculate a return on investment.
  • The time saved by creating custom applications to help me with my various daily tasks has been far greater than the time spent creating the applications.
No photo available

Pricing Details

Apache Web Server

General
Free Trial
Free/Freemium Version
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
Entry-level set up fee?
No
Additional Pricing Details

.NET

General
Free Trial
Free/Freemium Version
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
Entry-level set up fee?
No
Additional Pricing Details