Hi !
On Sat, 2 Aug 2003, The.Rock wrote:
> Date: Sat, 2 Aug 2003 13:50:32 -0500
> From: The.Rock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [PHP-WIN] Re: Apache or IIS
>
> I wouldn't call myself a guru with IIS, but I happen to know a lot about it.
&g
t you're doing to do it right, but it's a lot
more reliable and offers better security and flexibility.
My $.02
-Mike
-Original Message-
From: Jon Phipps [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, August 02, 2003 3:58 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [PHP-WIN] Re: Apache or IIS
You are right, I am getting tired of the hassles I face with my IIS5
bases system, previously functioning scripts that fail for no apparent
reason... and many other things. I think I am going to start configuring
apache for my system. I ran it some time ago and it runs much faster
than IIS in m
I've never used PHP with IIS... but run it on 2 Windows 2000 Apache (1.3.27)
servers in production, plus on 2 test workstations. I've had few problems.
There's plenty of tutorials on the net for configuring Apache to do all
sorts of things.
Craig Roberts
"The.Rock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in m
I wouldn't call myself a guru with IIS, but I happen to know a lot about it.
In my experience with IIS and PHP, the bigger the script the more IIS seems
to sag. Apache runs better and is more stable I think than IIS. The thing
about editing a conf file for the configuration is no big deal. If your
true... I've always thought that if someone can code php or java,
configuring a conf file should be (and is) a piece of cake. It suprises me
to find many developers have a morbid fear (or maybe it's just laziness) of
configuring servers by editing a conf file. I guess the division of labour
and hyp
What it boils down to is how comforatble are you editing the conf file
by hand. If you run multiple virtual servers on multiple domains from
one ip address then the setup in IIS is heaps easier than in apache.
However, that being said, apache does not suffer from the server worms
that IIS is su
We use both in production.
I'm biased, but we prefer Apache, even though I've had more issues with it.
(On win32) Prior to Apache 1.3.27, had a few issues with the apache service
dying every few days and not restarting (win2k event viewer didn't even know
it stopped) on a Compaq DL370 (ah there's
