IIS Reviews

We primarily use the solution for a publishing website.

The solution is the easiest way to publish applications which have been designed by older development tools.

Different parameters in this product can be a bit difficult. As soon as you introduce something new, and especially in the Microsoft environment, you always need to do new training sessions to understand what are new functionalities are. Finding the correct options are not more intuitive, and it should be.

The solution is very stable.

The scalability depends on how you have set it up. If you're running IIS on a single server, it might not be as capable as if you are on many in a cluster or with load balancing and so on.

We don't a contact for technical support, so I mostly have to cross my fingers and hope that nothing goes wrong.

I wasn't around for the initial setup, but I can say that we started fairly simple, and it's grown more and more complex as time has gone on.

We use the on-premises deployment model.

The solution is stable, it is working, and you can do a lot with this, but it is not my favorite product. I would prefer to use something that was open-source instead. I would rate it seven out of ten.

We primarily use the solution for the database and application system. We provide information systems for public and private companies.

The solution is easy to use, easy to maintain and isn't too technical. 

The solution's security needs improvement.

The solution should improve the cluster environment and load balancing.

Occasionally we have a problem with stability.

The scalability isn't so good. We have about 2,000 internal users, but externally we may have as many as one million users. Our service is public service. We do plan to increase usage.

We have a contract with technical support and they have helped us with issues in the past. We've been satisfied so far.

The solution is easy to set up. It took maybe an hour or two to deploy.

We use the private cloud deployment model.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten. I'd recommend the solution.

We primarily use the solution for our IT help desk interface.

All the features of Microsoft IIS are valuable.

The graphical user interface has room for improvement and can be more user-friendly.

The price of the solution has room for improvement.

I have been using the solution for over ten years.

The solution is very stable.

I give the scalability an eight out of ten.

We have around 150 end users.

The initial setup is complex because we are not familiar with the steps required to deploy. Over time, once we become familiar with the process the setup becomes easier.

I give the price of the solution a five out of ten.

I give the solution an eight out of ten.

I recommend Microsoft IIS to others.

• Clustering
• Application isolation

It needs a more compact configuration.

I've used it for one year.

No issues encountered.

It depends on the load of the server, but we have not had an issue.

No issues encountered.

I've not used customer service.

I've not used technical support.

We switched because of the nature of the application and technology.

I always design my systems simple and keep them simple as possible.

We implemented it with in-house team. We like to keep the knowledge in-house.

It was crucial and it definitely paid off.

Keep the systems simple. Try to work with open-source solutions and pay for technical support and subscription to support the projects.

Yes, I always and regularly evaluate. In case of Java we evaluated all applications servers which support JEE full profile.

I was using Apache Tomcat, JBoss AS (RedHat), WebMethods (Software AG) and IIS (Microsoft). All of them have they specialities, but depending on the goals and purpose it’s quiet easy to make a choice. Products based on Microsoft .NET do not give companies lot of options; either with Server Operating System shipped IIS, or the developer version called IIS Express. Applications written in Java, n opposite, can be accommodated on several fully profiled or non-fully-profiled application or web servers.

Only have one application per server if possible. Do not over complicate it, and keep the variance in the configuration simple as possible.

• Easy to set-up
• Good to maintain

This made the security set-up easier and authentication simplified.

• Logging
• Monitoring

I've used Microsoft NPS for four years.

No issues encountered.

No issues encountered.

No issues encountered but always gor for two machines as one isn't enough and isn't fault redundant.

Haven't needed it yet.

Haven't needed it yet.

Yes, we used RSA Radius. It was very hard to maintain and outdated.

Straightforward, it's a feature of Windows Server and a basic knowledge of the radius principles are enough.

In-house implementation.

Pretty good. Authentication for network appliances, load balancing products and wireless devices became easy to do.

It came with the Microsoft contract.

No, we were unhappy with RSA Radius so we went for the 'free' solution.

It has many features, make sure they satisfy your needs.

We primarily use the solution for the internet and opening applications. We use it, for example, to access Outlook on the web. We use it for a variety of Microsoft applications.

The solution is very stable. The solution is very simple and easy to use.

The level of technical support the solution offers could be improved.

I've been using the solution for one to two years.

The solution is stable, but they could improve on it a bit.

It's easy to scale the solution. We have about 200 users using it currently.

We've been in contact with technical support. They're okay, but they could be better in terms of the level of support they offer.

The solution was easy to set up. It only takes about one hour to deploy it.

We handled the deployment ourselves.

The pricing of the product could be improved.

We use the on-premises deployment model.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.

The primary use case of this solution is for infrastructure, Active Directory, infrastructure functionality, such as DHCP, and also, it's the main operating system for virtual machines.

What I like the most is that it is easy to use.

The price could be reduced.

In the next release, I would like to see better integration between the cloud environment and the on-premises environment.

I have been working with this solution for twenty years.

The stability is better than it was in the past. It is better today than it was five years ago.

I am no longer involved in the technical areas anymore. Instead, I am a part of the trade sales team. In this role, I have contacted Microsoft for the commercial parts but not for support.

The initial setup is straightforward.

It is deployed in all environments, on-premises and on the cloud.

The price of the cloud system is a bit high.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

We are basically using IIS like people use SharePoint. Technically IIS is a configurable web server. SharePoint is meant to be a collaborative tool. We configured IIS to be a collaborative tool of our own design.  

The most valuable parts of IIS are the interface, simplicity, and ease of management.  

There are a lot of security issues with IIS, and this has become more of a concern, especially recently. That security problem is the biggest disadvantage.  

Scalability is also a problem. Microsoft needs to improve on that aspect of the product. There are many limitations on IIS that seem like they should not be hard to remedy.  

On the other hand, Microsoft is doing more to concentrate on Azure for the cloud solution, so it may be their intent that Azure is ultimately the better solution.  

Overall, I have been working with IIS solutions on the cloud and on-premises for eight to ten years.  

Recently IIS has been more stable than in earlier releases and it has gotten better as it matured.  

I do not think that much of IIS as a very scalable solution. It is used by our entire organization, which is about 1,000-plus end-users. But the product itself has limitations built into it.  

We have a maximum of two people who manage the product. We work with it somewhat less now because of the scalability limitations and security issues, so we also dedicate less staff to projects with the product.  

The technical support is neutral: not good and not bad. It has become less satisfying because they changed how support is handled and we have to depend on forums. We do not have direct access to Microsoft support, in other words. It is not at all optimal.  

Microsoft tries to divert from this lack of interest in supporting the product, I think, by providing documentation. We also use the community and go into the forums — the Microsoft TechNet forums — and then use Google as a last resort. For technical support on IIS, it turns out that Google is our best friend.  

From the beginning, we have been using Microsoft products as our base solution. We have Unix and Apache and those things in addition in the places where we need them, but we are mainly running on IIS and Windows.  

The initial setup was straightforward. That is one of the biggest advantages for IIS. It takes just three or four clicks and the installation is done. The whole process takes just a few minutes.  

Recent versions, especially IIS 10, are very stable. For the stability I highly recommend IIS.  

On a scale from one to ten where one is the worst and ten is the best, I would rate IIS as an eight-out-of-ten.