We performed a comparison between Apache Web Server and IIS based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Infrastructure solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The control panel is very easy to navigate. It's similar to most hosting platforms, so it's user-friendly. Once you get used to it, managing your hosting becomes easy, too."
"Most of the features I liked were related to the performance during peak hours."
"The open-source nature is one of its most significant advantages."
"It's reliable, configurable and generally secure."
"It is more secure to use Apache and you will have fewer problems than other web services."
"The best thing about Apache is that it is open-source, so implementing my platform on-premises is less expansive than other solutions."
"Apache Web Server is free of cost."
"Apache has proven to be incredibly reliable, and everything has operated smoothly without encountering any issues."
"The product is flexible."
"It has an intuitive user interface and provides a lot of options for building reports."
"The solution is simple and very easy to manage compared to Linux."
"IIS has a very simple and user-friendly interface, which helps a lot in effective and efficient management."
"The product is scalable."
"The product is easy to configure."
"IIS is scalable."
"IIS is useful for the deployment of web applications...Its stability is good."
"So far, for us, everything is okay."
"By optimizing the infrastructure to allow the webserver to directly handle queries from memory—particularly by prioritizing the storage of queries in memory and processing them through the web server interface—I could potentially cut down the required instances from five hundred to two hundred."
"A monitoring interface would be great for this product. The monitoring dashboards for Apache's models are not included in the basic installation. You can install the basic monitoring model, then connect this model to another monitoring system."
"Lacks integration with some cloud solutions."
"There is a security-related problem that depends on the web server's configuration."
"For NGINX, I think it has NGINX Management Suite, which is GUI-based and allows you to manage your configuration via the user interface, but Apache fails to offer such capabilities to users."
"Its stability could be better."
"In future releases, I would like to see better server optimization."
"IIS could improve by Microsoft Windows improving the update services. We would like to be able to update all systems that are connected. The WSA service has to be in good order to accomplish this."
"I would like to see NLB features in IIS."
"This solution needs to be easier for cases where you want to have an IIS cluster."
"The solution's scalability needs improvement."
"The solution's stability needs improvement."
"The security must be improved."
"The platform's stability could be better."
"Performance-wise, certain improvements in IIS are needed...IIS is not scalable. Its scalability is less."
Apache Web Server is ranked 3rd in Application Infrastructure with 21 reviews while IIS is ranked 1st in Application Infrastructure with 53 reviews. Apache Web Server is rated 8.6, while IIS is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Apache Web Server writes "Has good security, speed and traffic handling features ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IIS writes " A simple and easy-to-use solution but not recommended for public apps". Apache Web Server is most compared with NGINX Plus, IBM WebSphere Application Server, Microsoft .NET Framework, Zend PHP Engine and IBM DataPower Gateway, whereas IIS is most compared with NGINX Plus, Tomcat, Oracle WebLogic Server, JBoss and Microsoft .NET Framework. See our Apache Web Server vs. IIS report.
See our list of best Application Infrastructure vendors.
We monitor all Application Infrastructure reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.