We just raised a $30M Series A: Read our story

Apache Web Server OverviewUNIXBusinessApplication

Apache Web Server is the #11 ranked solution in our list of top Application Infrastructure tools. It is most often compared to IIS: Apache Web Server vs IIS

What is Apache Web Server?

The Apache HTTP Server Project was founded in 1995 by a group of webmasters, known as The Apache Group, with the aim of developing robust, richly-featured, freely-available and commercial-standard Web (HTTP) server source code. The result was Apache Web Server or Apache HTTP Server, which is an open-source public-domain web server.

This collaborative project has been enhanced ever since with contributions from the core development team and other volunteers situated all over the globe. Also, hundreds of users of this open-source web server have contributed code, ideas, and documentation. The project falls under The Apache Software Foundation, which manages many open-source projects.

Apache Web Server is also known as Apache HTTP Server.

Buyer's Guide

Download the Application Infrastructure Buyer's Guide including reviews and more. Updated: September 2021

Apache Web Server Customers
Cisco, Intuit, General Electric, Adobe, VMware, PayPal, HP, EMC, eBay, Apple, SAP, Qualcomm, SanDisk, Allstate, FedEx
Apache Web Server Video

Pricing Advice

What users are saying about Apache Web Server pricing:
  • "The apache software is free, open-source."

Apache Web Server Reviews

Filter by:
Filter Reviews
Industry
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Company Size
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Job Level
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Rating
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Considered
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Order by:
Loading...
  • Date
  • Highest Rating
  • Lowest Rating
  • Review Length
Search:
Showingreviews based on the current filters. Reset all filters
Arash Haghighifard
Senior Administrator at IMCC ( Tejarat Iran Mall )
Real User
Top 20
Has good security, speed and traffic handling features

Pros and Cons

  • "It is more secure to use Apache and you will have fewer problems than other web services."
  • "The GUI for the less experienced users needs some improvement. For some companies, it is hard to configure it if they have not had any experience."

What is our primary use case?

Our primary use is as a web server, but we have other uses and how it is deployed depends on our scenario. We have 40 websites that are related to our company now, and for some of them, we have a serious problem with threats, attacks, and preventing the attacks. Because of this we often use Apache. The throughput is important for us. The locks and the reports are really important for us. Because of this, we install a Web Server with the ability to handle the reports and analysis.  

Depending on the situation and the scenario, we use different solutions. For example, with our switches, our choices depend on the access layers. In most scenarios, we have these four layers: access, distribution, aggregation, and core. If for the access layer we decide we are going to use Cisco. For the distribution layer, again we use Cisco, either the C9500 or C9300 depending on what we have planned to use it for. For the aggregation, we are going to use something from the Nexus line. The model depends on the throughput that is expected and the other choices we make. For the core, of course, again Cisco. But the model always depends on the throughput and the scenario in which we are going to use it. The C9600 is suitable for the more demanding scenarios.  

If we are going to do access with IUC (Cisco Unity Connection architecture), we are going to use a C9300 or if it is not so important for us to be so robust, we are going to use the 2960 Cisco Station. For distribution layers that use an IUC system or something that needs lots of features, we are going to use the C9500. But in some other cases, we will use the 3850 series for the distribution. For the aggregation, the throughput is calculated. We are going to use something from the Nexus series, but it depends on that throughput calculation. For the code layer, we are going to use Cisco again, but the model depends on the throughput and the scenario. If we want, we sometimes choose a different part number.  

Sometimes in the past, I had also used Huawei switches, but we mostly used them several years ago. In some situations where we calculate the throughput, it may not be suitable. For most of the projects in our country, we have limitations and regulations that control some of what we deploy. Because of that Cisco is a good solution for us. If you have limitations for providing equipment like shipping regulations or the other problems with export, we might be able to use the Huawei switches. It depends on the features, the regulations, and the throughput. They are good. I think they are very good. But now we mostly use Cisco even when we could also go with Huawei for a project.  

What is most valuable?

I think the speed and traffic handling are the most important things. It is also more secure to use Apache and will have fewer problems than other web services.  

What needs improvement?

The Apache Server and the Nginx load balancer are Linux based. This is good for our security. Windows has a lot of security issues. Maybe if we could find a good operator to configure it then it would be even more secure than the solution we use. But because of their support policies, for the intrusion and attacking defenses, cost, and throughput, we are going with the free scenarios, like Apache and Nginx. Maybe Windows is a good solution but we are not familiar with that. For a business that has other services related to Microsoft, it might be good sometimes if they used that. But we do not have other Microsoft services.  

Apache Server and the Nginx also do not require any licenses, and I think because of this that the support is not so good for us. It does not cost us money so this is a benefit for our budget. The product has a lot of experienced users and they share information. Because of this, it is possible for a company like us to find the information we need and we can use it. But the company does not have any support options in our country. We can find solutions on the websites or blogs or resources like that, but it would be nice so have a more formal support solution.  

As far as improvements, integration is important for us. So improving the possibilities and capabilities for integration is the first thing I would like to see. The other one is an improvement in implementation. The other one is improving the availability of support. I think also improving the GUI for the less experienced users. For some companies, it is hard to configure it if they have not had any experience. The setup is hard for them. For us it is not hard because we have experience with that, so we do not have any problem. But maybe changes to the GUI could be a benefit or become one of the advantages of this solution.  

For how long have I used the solution?

We have been using some Apache servers for around three years. I have experience with them.  

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

In my experience, Apache Web Server has been a good and stable solution. We do not have any problems with crashes or availability. If you stay upgraded with the current version of Apache and we do our job with maintenance, we don't have any problems. With the research for security and setup, we can make this more secure than the IAS (Integrated Access Systems). Because we use this roadmap, we have not had any crashes or any problems with the system. We just know to stay aware of releases and upgrades and take care of them when required.  

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

In my experience, this is a scalable solution. We have 40 websites on it now and it would not be hard to do more.  

How are customer service and technical support?

We have not been in touch with Apache technical support directly as they do not really make it available in our country. When we need more information we go find it for ourselves on the website, blogs or internet search.  

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

I have used other solutions for other reasons but we have only used Apache Web Server, the Nginx, Linux we are using, and the IAS (Integrated Access Systems). 

How was the initial setup?

If you have any experience with the initial setup of Apache Web Server, it is not a big deal. I think it is a good solution. I know we don't have any problems with doing the setup when we have to because we have years of experience.  

In the worst-case scenario, most people can do the basic setup in maybe one day. But for experienced people like us, it takes just a couple of hours. Even if you want to make sure about the services and the security issues and do some more complicated deployment and customization, maybe one day is enough for that.  

What about the implementation team?

For some of the deployments of the solution, I did it by myself. But it depends. For some of the deployment scenarios, I have a team that I use. We work together to get the bigger, more complicated installations done faster with several people.  

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

Apache is free but it is not free because you don't run software without a device or services. I do not know exactly. Because of the licenses and because of the prices, most of the companies go with Apache. Because the cost is so important for the companies, and because it's a free solution, most companies around — more than 65% — go with that solution.  

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

I have experience with Apache and configuring web services. In our country, we are using Apache for our websites because I know how to secure it. I know how to configure it. We have regulations that apply to our website in our country. The mixed solution with  Apache and Nginx that we are using works in our country. The best solution for the web servers — for the security of access — are going to come based on a mixed solution which is what Apache and Nginx together provide.  

What other advice do I have?

Of course, I would recommend this service because we have had a good experience with it.  

On a scale from one to ten where one is the worst and ten is the best, I would rate Apache Web Server as an eight.  

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
CF
VP at a computer software company with 201-500 employees
Real User
Top 5Leaderboard
Easy to use and quick to deploy with good security

Pros and Cons

  • "The solution offers good security."
  • "Things change very fast. We're always on the lookout for better approaches and tools. If the solution falls behind, we may have to switch."

What is our primary use case?

We primarily use the solution for deployment. We use it for our internet banking portal.

What is most valuable?

The solution is very stable. It comes with good flexibility as well.

We've found the product to be scalable.

It's a solution that's fairly easy to use.

The solution offers good security.

The product has good compatibility with other solutions.

What needs improvement?

I haven't really gone in deep in utilizing the full functionality of the product just yet. We just use it enough to run our application. There's probably a lot on the solution we haven't even tried. 

It's good enough to run and deploy our application. Therefore, I can't really speak to anything that is lacking.

Things change very fast. We're always on the lookout for better approaches and tools. If the solution falls behind, we may have to switch.

Nowadays, the user actually requests to do their own maintenance instead of relying on the vendor. We're looking for something that's easy to understand for the user so that they can do their own maintenance.

For how long have I used the solution?

I've been using the solution for about four or five years at this point. It's been a while.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The solution is extremely stable. We haven't had any issues with bugs or glitches and it doesn't crash or freeze. It's been reliable.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The solution can scale if you need it to.

In our case, normally we don't do a lot of processing on the webserver. It's pretty lightweight usage.

We do pa=lan to continue to use the solution going forward.

How are customer service and technical support?

We rarely need technical support. We might need more support when it comes to the database, however, for the web server, it's pretty problem-free. We're satisfied with the support. That said, we rarely use it.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup is not complex at all. We were able to very easily set up and deploy the solution. It was straightforward.

The deployment is very fast. Everything is smooth. The setting firewall, everything, is quick and then it just takes one or two hours to install it.

Since the setup is pretty easy, you only really need two people to deploy it.

What about the implementation team?

We handled the initial setup ourselves, in-house. It's relatively simple to set up, and therefore we didn't need the assistance of any integrators or consultants.

Normally we need a team to make sure the firewall is set up properly. Installation cannot work if the firewall is not available.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

We pay for the solution yearly. I cannot speak to the exact amount the organization pays as the licensing part of the solution isn't something I deal with directly.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

We've tried a few different solutions. At the very beginning, we're using Tomcat Apache. After that, we switched to AWS, After AWS, we moved to this product and we've been with it ever since. 

What other advice do I have?

We're just a customer. We are an end-user of Apache.

We haven't done any recent upgrades and therefore aren't likely using the latest version of the solution currently.

So far we are still exploring to see what are the best or the more cost-effective tools for us to integrate as there are so many properties we need to integrate with different protocols. So, we are still exploring, looking for the best approach.

I'd recommend the solution.

Overall, I'd rate the solution at a seven out of ten. We've been mostly happy with that product so far.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Flag as inappropriate
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache, Zend, Microsoft and others in Application Infrastructure. Updated: September 2021.
540,884 professionals have used our research since 2012.
NimaBahraini
Senior System Design Engineer at a tech services company with 201-500 employees
Real User
Top 20
A stable solution that is cost-effective and straightforward to deploy

Pros and Cons

  • "The best thing about Apache is that it is open-source, so implementing my platform on-premises is less expansive than other solutions."
  • "It would be great if technical support for Apache were available in Iran. It is a very important need."

What is our primary use case?

I am currently using Apache Web Server and it is integrated with Apache JMeter and Tomcat. I run these solutions in a virtualized environment that is in a private cloud, on-premises.

We are a solution provider and our primary use case is creating web servers on core banking systems. 

What is most valuable?

The best thing about Apache is that it is open-source, so implementing my platform on-premises is less expansive than other solutions.

What needs improvement?

Better integration with other environments is needed.

It would be great if technical support for Apache were available in Iran. It is a very important need.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been working with Apache Web Server for ten years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

This is a stable solution. One of the people I know is the system administrator of some systems that I have deployed in the past, and those systems are stable today.

How are customer service and technical support?

Being in Iran, we do not have access to technical support because of sanctions. However, we have been able to solve any problems ourselves.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup is straightforward. If you are just learning or reading about this solution, the decisions to make are not very complex.

What other advice do I have?

The first point of using these services is that you have to use scripts for deploying the web servers on the systems. They can be effectively used in many platforms and deployed for heavy duties, but tuning and improving them requires some work. Automating with scripts will help to save some time.

My advice to anybody who is implementing this solution is to deploy it on a Linux-based server and follow the best practices. 

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
GK
Information Security Consultant to the CRO at a financial services firm with 201-500 employees
Consultant
Can be done in a cluster configuration and is very scalable

Pros and Cons

  • "Its community is its most valuable feature. Solving problems is easier on Apache because so many people know this product."
  • "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."

What is our primary use case?

I have used it for PHP web servers and also as a proxy for Java application servers. I have used the Apache model for the Java infrastructure.

What is most valuable?

Its community is its most valuable feature. Solving problems is easier on Apache because so many people know this product. It's the most iconic, used web server in the world that I know.

What needs improvement?

The improvement can be done in the versions. Even though there are newer, stabler versions available, if you are installing from a data center, you have to install the older version. Then, installing the newer version is uncomfortable as it has to be done manually.

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.

For how long have I used the solution?

Five years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

It is stable.

With Apache, you can't update the system. There is a big gap between models. I don't like this.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

You can do it in a cluster configuration, and it is very scalable.

We have 5,000 users.

How are customer service and technical support?

I have not used the technical support.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

I have used a number of servers. Previously, I used NGINX. I switched to Apache because it has model and is more flexible.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup is easy.

It took 15 minutes to deploy.

What about the implementation team?

I deployed the solution myself.

What other advice do I have?

I would recommend the solution to others.

I would rate this solution as a nine (out of 10).

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Product Categories
Application Infrastructure
Buyer's Guide
Download our free Application Infrastructure Report and find out what your peers are saying about Apache, Zend, Microsoft, and more!