Results 1 to 17 of 17

Thread: Apache 2.0 for Win32

  1. Apr 16th, 2002, 07:50 AM #1
    CiberTHuG
    CiberTHuG is offline

    Thread Starter
    Frenzied Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Posts
    1,140

    Apache 2.0 for Win32

    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.
    Travis, Kung Foo Journeyman
    As always, RTFM.

    WWW Standards: HTML 4.01, CSS Level 2, ECMA 262 Bindings to DOM Level 1, JavaScript 1.3 Guide and Reference
    Perl: Learn Perl, Llama, Camel, Cookbook, Perl Monks, Perl Mongers, O'Reilly's Perl.com, ActiveState, CPAN, TPJ, and use Perl;
    YBMS, but Mozilla doesn't.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  2. Apr 16th, 2002, 07:59 AM #2
    JPicasso
    JPicasso is offline
    Fanatic Member JPicasso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Kalamazoo, MI
    Posts
    843
    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.
    Merry Christmas
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  3. Apr 16th, 2002, 02:42 PM #3
    thinktank2
    thinktank2 is offline
    Hyperactive Member thinktank2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Arctic
    Posts
    272
    No Thanks. I would rather have Apache installed on FreeBSD than in windows.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  4. Apr 16th, 2002, 03:16 PM #4
    zmerlinz
    zmerlinz is offline
    Fanatic Member zmerlinz's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    in a world where the sun always shines on the bloody tv!!
    Posts
    604
    Originally posted by JPicasso
    Apache's were some pretty tough dudes.

    I had some pretty blue stones to
    show them.
    little blue stones ??

    Some people have told me they don't think a fat penguin really embodies the grace of Linux, which just tells me they have never seen a angry penguin charging at them in excess of 100mph. They'd be a lot more careful about what they say if they had.
    -- Linus Torvalds

    [Galahtech.com] | [My Site] | [Fishsponge] | [UnixForum.co.uk]
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  6. Apr 16th, 2002, 04:26 PM #5
    Armatendo
    Armatendo is offline
    Lively Member Armatendo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    68
    No Thanks. I would rather have Apache installed on FreeBSD than in windows
    lol, same here.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  7. Apr 16th, 2002, 04:36 PM #6
    CiberTHuG
    CiberTHuG is offline

    Thread Starter
    Frenzied Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Posts
    1,140
    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.
    Travis, Kung Foo Journeyman
    As always, RTFM.

    WWW Standards: HTML 4.01, CSS Level 2, ECMA 262 Bindings to DOM Level 1, JavaScript 1.3 Guide and Reference
    Perl: Learn Perl, Llama, Camel, Cookbook, Perl Monks, Perl Mongers, O'Reilly's Perl.com, ActiveState, CPAN, TPJ, and use Perl;
    YBMS, but Mozilla doesn't.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  8. Apr 16th, 2002, 04:39 PM #7
    Armatendo
    Armatendo is offline
    Lively Member Armatendo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    68
    That's true
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  9. Apr 16th, 2002, 06:43 PM #8
    JungleMan
    JungleMan is offline
    Frenzied Member JungleMan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Posts
    2,033
    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 bringing geeky back...
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  11. Apr 16th, 2002, 06:44 PM #9
    filburt1
    filburt1 is offline
    Member filburt1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 1999
    Posts
    6,935
    I'm still using 1.3.24 locally on my system, haven't played with Apache 2 (too new) or IIS (security?).
    TurtleTips.com | My Forums
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  12. Apr 16th, 2002, 06:45 PM #10
    JungleMan
    JungleMan is offline
    Frenzied Member JungleMan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Posts
    2,033
    Originally posted by thinktank2
    No Thanks. I would rather have Apache installed on FreeBSD than in windows.
    Yeah but some people use their machines as gaming rigs AND servers
    I'm bringing geeky back...
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  13. Apr 16th, 2002, 06:51 PM #11
    CiberTHuG
    CiberTHuG is offline

    Thread Starter
    Frenzied Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Posts
    1,140
    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.
    Travis, Kung Foo Journeyman
    As always, RTFM.

    WWW Standards: HTML 4.01, CSS Level 2, ECMA 262 Bindings to DOM Level 1, JavaScript 1.3 Guide and Reference
    Perl: Learn Perl, Llama, Camel, Cookbook, Perl Monks, Perl Mongers, O'Reilly's Perl.com, ActiveState, CPAN, TPJ, and use Perl;
    YBMS, but Mozilla doesn't.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  14. Apr 16th, 2002, 06:52 PM #12
    JungleMan
    JungleMan is offline
    Frenzied Member JungleMan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Posts
    2,033
    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.
    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.

    My windows box has run for weeks on end...
    I'm bringing geeky back...
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  15. Apr 16th, 2002, 06:53 PM #13
    chrisjk
    chrisjk is offline
    PowerPoster
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Posts
    5,923
    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.
    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.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  16. Apr 16th, 2002, 06:55 PM #14
    JungleMan
    JungleMan is offline
    Frenzied Member JungleMan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Posts
    2,033
    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.
    Yeah I agree with Chris 100%.

    I'd probably run Linux myself on a server-only box, but when it comes to my main box, don't think so...
    I'm bringing geeky back...
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  17. Apr 16th, 2002, 06:58 PM #15
    Armatendo
    Armatendo is offline
    Lively Member Armatendo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    68
    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.
    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
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  18. Apr 17th, 2002, 03:48 AM #16
    zmerlinz
    zmerlinz is offline
    Fanatic Member zmerlinz's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    in a world where the sun always shines on the bloody tv!!
    Posts
    604
    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 ??

    Some people have told me they don't think a fat penguin really embodies the grace of Linux, which just tells me they have never seen a angry penguin charging at them in excess of 100mph. They'd be a lot more careful about what they say if they had.
    -- Linus Torvalds

    [Galahtech.com] | [My Site] | [Fishsponge] | [UnixForum.co.uk]
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  19. Apr 17th, 2002, 06:23 AM #17
    chrisjk
    chrisjk is offline
    PowerPoster
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Posts
    5,923
    just for clarification and giggles, when I said "anything other than Windows", I meant as your only OS
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
« Previous Thread | Next Thread »

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Forum Rules


Click Here to Expand Forum to Full Width