DIY

Surveys find Microsoft's IIS succeeding over Apache


Microsoft IIS over ApacheSurveys by two research firms, NetCraft and Port80 Software, found that Microsoft's Internet Information Server was fast gaining over the open source Apache Server.

An excerpt from ComputerWorld New Zealand:

"While NetCraft's recent surveys demonstrate the rise of Microsoft's Internet Information Services across the Internet at large, Port80 Software continues to see IIS beating Apache among leading U.S. enterprise companies," says Joseph Lima, Director of Product Development at Port80 Software.

A few pointers from the article are presented below:

  • Microsoft grew to 36.2% of all active Web sites, while Apache lost nearly a million Web site names, as its share of active Web sites fell to 48.4%
  • IIS 4, 5, 6, and 7 deployments continue a four-year lead in the survey with a combined 55% share of all Fortune 1000 corporate sites, versus Apache's 24.9% share

The survey by Port80 software also found that Microsoft's ASP.NET and ASP Application Servers are currently used in 51.5% of Fortune 1000 sites. That is attributed to the cumulative advantage of the dominance of Microsoft IIS.

An insightful article by Robin Bloor at Channel Register points to why the statistics of dominance of Microsoft should not be taken as a sign of the waning of open source. Case in point being that open-source software encourages a DIY (Do-It-Yourself) approach, which cannot be all covered in a market survey. However, the question remains whether open source will ever capture major market share over proprietary competition.

13 comments
dwulkan
dwulkan

Any time you have proprietary stuff you can always shrug your shoulders and tell your boss that you have made a call to the vendors support line. D-I-Y means you support it yourself. I don't doubt that Fortune 1000 companies can easily afford those extravagant support contracts. Lean and mean companies on the other hand, do not use IIS.

n3ur0
n3ur0

haa... i have doubt that MS has funded this survey!!! well take the top 10 websites( no of hits), yahoo, google to ebay, amazon.. 9 out of 10 r running on apache, any one plz tell me can IIS handle google server (cluster)queries... which is running so many services!!

Tony Hopkinson
Tony Hopkinson

Most of them will be windows houses, the will have MS Servers, they get IIS for free, and they are generally scared of non ms solutions because they don't know anything about them. Give me a break.. Say there's a subject line, now that was a good idea, pity the first article I saw with this innovative facility was such drivel.

robertbrown
robertbrown

I would like to see the declaration of funding source for both studies, please.

blissb
blissb

I wonder what the percentages would be if all the single-page, parked domains (i.e. godaddy.com) were stripped out. Seems to me I recall that there was a significant jump in IIS's numbers when Microsoft purchased godaddy and transformed all its systems to IIS.

nick.ursa
nick.ursa

ASP.NET 2 is a much more viable platform for sophisticated apps than it used to be. MIT recently switched from java to C# for 1st year developers and I see .NET as much as J2EE in app jobs. As well, when I go to more sophisticated sites there are alot more .aspx is the URLs these days. I've been an open source programmer but recent .NET projects opened my eyes quite a bit, so I think it's the language and Framework improvements that make it more appealing than it used to. Hence more IIS than apache/tomcat or whatever app stack.

JohnnySacks
JohnnySacks

Review is between web servers but web application stack is the primary focus? If so, then are Tomcat/JBoss/Websphere/Resin... etc. even included as part of the review? Kind of like reading a comparison of tires where someone states the tires on a Corolla are not as good as the tires on a Corvette (or something like that...) I'll take some heat for this but comparing Apache/PHP to ASP.NET is not apples to apples. The Java web framework vs. ASP.NET is a much more valid comparison. Part of the comparison should include the up front and incidental cost of setting up a LEGITIMATE development, testing, and production environment for each.

pr.arun
pr.arun

Does Open Source have the ability to take over proprietary software?

nicholson.eric
nicholson.eric

As long as developers continue using and colleges teach MS Visual Basic and asp.net, MS will continue to dominate. Problem: apps will continue to be inferior and get worse.

hillman.d
hillman.d

I can see that happening. The reason is probably due to ASP.NET. I have used Apache 1 and 2, MySQL, IIS 5 and 6, SQL Server 2000 and 2005. In my opinion, ASP.NET is a very good platform for heavy-duty Web applications. Our company recently upgraded a bunch of boxes that are now running Windows 2003 Server and IIS for external and internal sites. While I like UNIX servers better for overall security and remote management, IIS has gotten very powerful with ASP.NET 2.0. You can't beat virtual directories, easy code reuse, development in multiple languages, easy access to multiple databases, modular security, etc. If the Mono group can get ASP.NET working properly on UNIX boxes, I think that would be the best of both worlds. Until then, we are sticking with IIS and .NET.

dcatkin
dcatkin

After about 7 years running web sites on the net, and trying both types of servers, I find apache and php to be far more secure, and easier ot manage across all of our web sites. Furthermore I don't think that Microsoft is the answer to all the worlds problems, I find mysql to be a much higher performing and in general an easier database system to run and maintain. Over the years I have found asp to be a less reliable and more cumbersome programming language, and I will never go to a Microsoft system as long as I own this company. David C. Atkin

dcatkin
dcatkin

After about 7 years running web sites on the net, and trying both types of servers, I find apache and php to be far more secure, and easier ot manage across all of our web sites. Furthermore I don't think that Microsoft is the answer to all the worlds problems, I find mysql to be a much higher performing and in general an easier database system to run and maintain. Over the years I have found asp to be a less reliable and more cumbersome programming language, and I will never go to a Microsoft system as long as I own this company. David C. Atkin

ziff
ziff

Dear David, Sorry, but I think you need to get your IT / Development skills to be updated. At first, ASP is NOT a "programming language", but a development model / platform - and it's dying very fast and has no longer support from Microsoft (at least in terms of improvement, new features and so on) so it's not relevant to be discussed these days - as .Net and ASP.Net came to stay with a programming / deployment model that turned ASP upside down. Also, you said you've been running web sites for 7 years, and I realize now your preference is about Apache. I'm pretty sure you quit using IIS a long time ago. So, I'm also sure you don't even have an idea about how IIS has been improved in version 6.0 - and now, 7.0 on Windows 2008. Second, when you say MySQL is a "higher performing and in general an easier database system to run and maintain", again I assume you're not familiar with MSSQL 2005 / 2008. It's not possible to compare them with MySQL - it's like to compare Oracle and MS Access. Of course I agree that if you are talking about running them on the same hardware, MySQL will perform faster - but it's only usable in cases where you are needing only a "data repository", and not a real DBMS: when you begin to think about Stored Procedures, transactions, etc - MySQL loses again. On the other hand, I think every scenario has it's own "best platform fit". So, I think I could use LAMP sometimes - but it's the last thing I would. Best regards, Jairo De Moraes

Editor's Picks