Interesting article at eWeek. Apache finally becomes an alternative for IIS on Win32. Given security concerns, Apache probably becomes a favorable alternative.
Wow. Now that is pretty cool.
Printable View
Interesting article at eWeek. Apache finally becomes an alternative for IIS on Win32. Given security concerns, Apache probably becomes a favorable alternative.
Wow. Now that is pretty cool.
Apache's were some pretty tough dudes.
I wouldn't want to mess with them.
not unless I had some pretty blue stones to
show them.
No Thanks. I would rather have Apache installed on FreeBSD than in windows.
little blue stones ??Quote:
Originally posted by JPicasso
Apache's were some pretty tough dudes.
I had some pretty blue stones to
show them.
lol, same here.Quote:
No Thanks. I would rather have Apache installed on FreeBSD than in windows
Yes, I would rather have most any OS instead of Windows, but now if you have to use Windows, you have a very nice alternative to IIS.
That's true :)
I used IIS for a bit and had no problems whatsoever.
I still am using Apache 2 though even though I could've gotten away with any silly web software as my server is light-usage :)
I'm still using 1.3.24 locally on my system, haven't played with Apache 2 (too new) or IIS (security?).
Yeah but some people use their machines as gaming rigs AND servers ;)Quote:
Originally posted by thinktank2
No Thanks. I would rather have Apache installed on FreeBSD than in windows.
Well, I got my Apache rig up this past weekend. And the port sentry software reported attempts on IIS weaknesses within the first 12 hours.
That is why I didn't bother putting IIS on my Windows box. Now I have a Linux box with Apache. I will probably have to apply a tenth as many security fixes, and I don't have to worry about something crashing the system. Windows uptime is measure in hours, Linux in months.
Right but again some people use it for more than just servers :)Apache is good though...was a ***** to install but it works fine I don't even think about it...VERY hard to set up though.Quote:
Originally posted by CiberTHuG
Well, I got my Apache rig up this past weekend. And the port sentry software reported attempts on IIS weaknesses within the first 12 hours.
That is why I didn't bother putting IIS on my Windows box. Now I have a Linux box with Apache. I will probably have to apply a tenth as many security fixes, and I don't have to worry about something crashing the system. Windows uptime is measure in hours, Linux in months.
My windows box has run for weeks on end...:confused:
if you mean on a web server, then I would agree.Quote:
Originally posted by CiberTHuG
Yes, I would rather have most any OS instead of Windows, but now if you have to use Windows, you have a very nice alternative to IIS.
For a desktop though I would say it's pointless having anything other than Windows.
Yeah I agree with Chris 100%.Quote:
Originally posted by chrisjk
if you mean on a web server, then I would agree.
For a desktop though I would say it's pointless having anything other than Windows.
I'd probably run Linux myself on a server-only box, but when it comes to my main box, don't think so...
definately, but i suppose if you know everything there is to know about linux, you can set it up perfect :) or you could get windows running within linux :DQuote:
Originally posted by chrisjk
if you mean on a web server, then I would agree.
For a desktop though I would say it's pointless having anything other than Windows.
linux isn't that bad for a desktop system, i have SuSE running on my desktop that is setup as a server, and i also have it on my laptop but i dual boot in 2k because there are somethings that i haven't found a way to do in linux yet.
but i have to use linux quite a lot in my course so i suppose that is why i like using it ??
just for clarification and giggles, when I said "anything other than Windows", I meant as your only OS :)