Coming October 25: PeerSpot Awards will be announced! Learn more

Apache Web Server OverviewUNIXBusinessApplication

Apache Web Server is #10 ranked solution in top Application Infrastructure tools. PeerSpot users give Apache Web Server an average rating of 7.0 out of 10. Apache Web Server is most commonly compared to IIS: Apache Web Server vs IIS. Apache Web Server is popular among the large enterprise segment, accounting for 67% of users researching this solution on PeerSpot. The top industry researching this solution are professionals from a comms service provider, accounting for 18% of all views.
Buyer's Guide

Download the Application Infrastructure Buyer's Guide including reviews and more. Updated: September 2022

What is Apache Web Server?

The Apache HTTP Server Project was founded in 1995 by a group of webmasters, known as The Apache Group, with the aim of developing robust, richly-featured, freely-available and commercial-standard Web (HTTP) server source code. The result was Apache Web Server or Apache HTTP Server, which is an open-source public-domain web server.

This collaborative project has been enhanced ever since with contributions from the core development team and other volunteers situated all over the globe. Also, hundreds of users of this open-source web server have contributed code, ideas, and documentation. The project falls under The Apache Software Foundation, which manages many open-source projects.

Apache Web Server was previously known as Apache HTTP Server.

Apache Web Server Customers
Cisco, Intuit, General Electric, Adobe, VMware, PayPal, HP, EMC, eBay, Apple, SAP, Qualcomm, SanDisk, Allstate, FedEx
Apache Web Server Video

Archived Apache Web Server Reviews (more than two years old)

Filter by:
Filter Reviews
Industry
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Company Size
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Job Level
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Rating
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Considered
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Order by:
Loading...
  • Date
  • Highest Rating
  • Lowest Rating
  • Review Length
Search:
Showingreviews based on the current filters. Reset all filters
Information Security Consultant to the CRO at a financial services firm with 201-500 employees
Consultant
Can be done in a cluster configuration and is very scalable
Pros and Cons
  • "Its community is its most valuable feature. Solving problems is easier on Apache because so many people know this product."
  • "A monitoring interface would be great for this product. The monitoring dashboards for Apache's models are not included in the basic installation. You can install the basic monitoring model, then connect this model to another monitoring system."

What is our primary use case?

I have used it for PHP web servers and also as a proxy for Java application servers. I have used the Apache model for the Java infrastructure.

What is most valuable?

Its community is its most valuable feature. Solving problems is easier on Apache because so many people know this product. It's the most iconic, used web server in the world that I know.

What needs improvement?

The improvement can be done in the versions. Even though there are newer, stabler versions available, if you are installing from a data center, you have to install the older version. Then, installing the newer version is uncomfortable as it has to be done manually.

A monitoring interface would be great for this product. The monitoring dashboards for Apache's models are not included in the basic installation. You can install the basic monitoring model, then connect this model to another monitoring system.

For how long have I used the solution?

Five years.

Buyer's Guide
Application Infrastructure
September 2022
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache, Microsoft, Zend and others in Application Infrastructure. Updated: September 2022.
633,952 professionals have used our research since 2012.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

It is stable.

With Apache, you can't update the system. There is a big gap between models. I don't like this.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

You can do it in a cluster configuration, and it is very scalable.

We have 5,000 users.

How are customer service and support?

I have not used the technical support.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

I have used a number of servers. Previously, I used NGINX. I switched to Apache because it has model and is more flexible.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup is easy.

It took 15 minutes to deploy.

What about the implementation team?

I deployed the solution myself.

What other advice do I have?

I would recommend the solution to others.

I would rate this solution as a nine (out of 10).

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
Arash Haghighifard - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Administrator at IMCC ( Tejarat Iran Mall )
Real User
Has good security, speed and traffic handling features
Pros and Cons
  • "It is more secure to use Apache and you will have fewer problems than other web services."
  • "The GUI for the less experienced users needs some improvement. For some companies, it is hard to configure it if they have not had any experience."

What is our primary use case?

Our primary use is as a web server, but we have other uses and how it is deployed depends on our scenario. We have 40 websites that are related to our company now, and for some of them, we have a serious problem with threats, attacks, and preventing the attacks. Because of this we often use Apache. The throughput is important for us. The locks and the reports are really important for us. Because of this, we install a Web Server with the ability to handle the reports and analysis.  

Depending on the situation and the scenario, we use different solutions. For example, with our switches, our choices depend on the access layers. In most scenarios, we have these four layers: access, distribution, aggregation, and core. If for the access layer we decide we are going to use Cisco. For the distribution layer, again we use Cisco, either the C9500 or C9300 depending on what we have planned to use it for. For the aggregation, we are going to use something from the Nexus line. The model depends on the throughput that is expected and the other choices we make. For the core, of course, again Cisco. But the model always depends on the throughput and the scenario in which we are going to use it. The C9600 is suitable for the more demanding scenarios.  

If we are going to do access with IUC (Cisco Unity Connection architecture), we are going to use a C9300 or if it is not so important for us to be so robust, we are going to use the 2960 Cisco Station. For distribution layers that use an IUC system or something that needs lots of features, we are going to use the C9500. But in some other cases, we will use the 3850 series for the distribution. For the aggregation, the throughput is calculated. We are going to use something from the Nexus series, but it depends on that throughput calculation. For the code layer, we are going to use Cisco again, but the model depends on the throughput and the scenario. If we want, we sometimes choose a different part number.  

Sometimes in the past, I had also used Huawei switches, but we mostly used them several years ago. In some situations where we calculate the throughput, it may not be suitable. For most of the projects in our country, we have limitations and regulations that control some of what we deploy. Because of that Cisco is a good solution for us. If you have limitations for providing equipment like shipping regulations or the other problems with export, we might be able to use the Huawei switches. It depends on the features, the regulations, and the throughput. They are good. I think they are very good. But now we mostly use Cisco even when we could also go with Huawei for a project.  

What is most valuable?

I think the speed and traffic handling are the most important things. It is also more secure to use Apache and will have fewer problems than other web services.  

What needs improvement?

The Apache Server and the Nginx load balancer are Linux based. This is good for our security. Windows has a lot of security issues. Maybe if we could find a good operator to configure it then it would be even more secure than the solution we use. But because of their support policies, for the intrusion and attacking defenses, cost, and throughput, we are going with the free scenarios, like Apache and Nginx. Maybe Windows is a good solution but we are not familiar with that. For a business that has other services related to Microsoft, it might be good sometimes if they used that. But we do not have other Microsoft services.  

Apache Server and the Nginx also do not require any licenses, and I think because of this that the support is not so good for us. It does not cost us money so this is a benefit for our budget. The product has a lot of experienced users and they share information. Because of this, it is possible for a company like us to find the information we need and we can use it. But the company does not have any support options in our country. We can find solutions on the websites or blogs or resources like that, but it would be nice so have a more formal support solution.  

As far as improvements, integration is important for us. So improving the possibilities and capabilities for integration is the first thing I would like to see. The other one is an improvement in implementation. The other one is improving the availability of support. I think also improving the GUI for the less experienced users. For some companies, it is hard to configure it if they have not had any experience. The setup is hard for them. For us it is not hard because we have experience with that, so we do not have any problem. But maybe changes to the GUI could be a benefit or become one of the advantages of this solution.  

For how long have I used the solution?

We have been using some Apache servers for around three years. I have experience with them.  

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

In my experience, Apache Web Server has been a good and stable solution. We do not have any problems with crashes or availability. If you stay upgraded with the current version of Apache and we do our job with maintenance, we don't have any problems. With the research for security and setup, we can make this more secure than the IAS (Integrated Access Systems). Because we use this roadmap, we have not had any crashes or any problems with the system. We just know to stay aware of releases and upgrades and take care of them when required.  

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

In my experience, this is a scalable solution. We have 40 websites on it now and it would not be hard to do more.  

How are customer service and technical support?

We have not been in touch with Apache technical support directly as they do not really make it available in our country. When we need more information we go find it for ourselves on the website, blogs or internet search.  

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

I have used other solutions for other reasons but we have only used Apache Web Server, the Nginx, Linux we are using, and the IAS (Integrated Access Systems). 

How was the initial setup?

If you have any experience with the initial setup of Apache Web Server, it is not a big deal. I think it is a good solution. I know we don't have any problems with doing the setup when we have to because we have years of experience.  

In the worst-case scenario, most people can do the basic setup in maybe one day. But for experienced people like us, it takes just a couple of hours. Even if you want to make sure about the services and the security issues and do some more complicated deployment and customization, maybe one day is enough for that.  

What about the implementation team?

For some of the deployments of the solution, I did it by myself. But it depends. For some of the deployment scenarios, I have a team that I use. We work together to get the bigger, more complicated installations done faster with several people.  

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

Apache is free but it is not free because you don't run software without a device or services. I do not know exactly. Because of the licenses and because of the prices, most of the companies go with Apache. Because the cost is so important for the companies, and because it's a free solution, most companies around — more than 65% — go with that solution.  

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

I have experience with Apache and configuring web services. In our country, we are using Apache for our websites because I know how to secure it. I know how to configure it. We have regulations that apply to our website in our country. The mixed solution with  Apache and Nginx that we are using works in our country. The best solution for the web servers — for the security of access — are going to come based on a mixed solution which is what Apache and Nginx together provide.  

What other advice do I have?

Of course, I would recommend this service because we have had a good experience with it.  

On a scale from one to ten where one is the worst and ten is the best, I would rate Apache Web Server as an eight.  

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
Buyer's Guide
Application Infrastructure
September 2022
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache, Microsoft, Zend and others in Application Infrastructure. Updated: September 2022.
633,952 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Senior Supervisor of Virtualisation & DevOps at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
Real User
A stable solution that is cost-effective and straightforward to deploy
Pros and Cons
  • "The best thing about Apache is that it is open-source, so implementing my platform on-premises is less expansive than other solutions."
  • "It would be great if technical support for Apache were available in Iran. It is a very important need."

What is our primary use case?

I am currently using Apache Web Server and it is integrated with Apache JMeter and Tomcat. I run these solutions in a virtualized environment that is in a private cloud, on-premises.

We are a solution provider and our primary use case is creating web servers on core banking systems. 

What is most valuable?

The best thing about Apache is that it is open-source, so implementing my platform on-premises is less expansive than other solutions.

What needs improvement?

Better integration with other environments is needed.

It would be great if technical support for Apache were available in Iran. It is a very important need.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been working with Apache Web Server for ten years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

This is a stable solution. One of the people I know is the system administrator of some systems that I have deployed in the past, and those systems are stable today.

How are customer service and technical support?

Being in Iran, we do not have access to technical support because of sanctions. However, we have been able to solve any problems ourselves.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup is straightforward. If you are just learning or reading about this solution, the decisions to make are not very complex.

What other advice do I have?

The first point of using these services is that you have to use scripts for deploying the web servers on the systems. They can be effectively used in many platforms and deployed for heavy duties, but tuning and improving them requires some work. Automating with scripts will help to save some time.

My advice to anybody who is implementing this solution is to deploy it on a Linux-based server and follow the best practices. 

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
it_user240036 - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior IT Architect at a university with 5,001-10,000 employees
Vendor
Apache vs. Nginx

Originally posted https://zitseng.com/archives/10435

Apache or Nginx. This is a question that many website administrators have considered. It’s a question that I’ve also considered several times, and again just the past week. Apache is the most popular web server on the Internet. Nginx, on the other hand, is designed for crazy fast performance. Fast is always good to have.

I’ve been making some incremental changes to my website. It’s all under the hood. One thing that inevitably surfaces is about performance. I’ve been using Apache from the beginning. It’s completely functional, and does everything I need it to do. It might not  be the fastest web server software, but it’s no slow coach either.

Nginx is the newer kid on the block. It was first released in 2004, so it’s not really all that new anymore. It does have a reputation for performance, both in terms of raw speed and ability to scale to significant load.

But is Nginx really faster? I know it’s popularly believed to be faster than Apache, but I’m the sort who must try, see, and believe. Well, at least if it’s something practical that I can do.

My test would be on my live WordPress blog website. It is a typical LAMP setup: Linux, Apache, MariaDB and PHP (via mod_php). On the exact same system, I installed and configured Nginx. Since there’s no equivalent of mod_php in Nginx, I took the opportunity to move from mod_php to php-fpm. So at this point, everything’s absolutely identical, and I can just switch between Apache and Nginx anytime with ease.

You know what? I found negligible difference between Apache and Nginx. My test was merely intended to replicated the realistic type of volume my website handles. It isn’t a lot. I was more concerned about the speed at which the web server could respond to requests. I had expected to see some clear wins with Nginx. But no.

Perhaps Apache has caught up with Nginx. I didn’t see much difference in memory utilisation either. Yes, that’s another surprise for me.

If you must know, Apache actually came out slightly better, but it’s only less than 3% faster than serving requests and just about 3% better at memory.

Just to shed a bit more information, my Apache is version 2.4.6, not the latest at all, but I do use their new mpm_event worker. This is the latest of Apache’s multiprocessing model.

I made up my own test suite, in case you were wondering. Many people like to use Apache’s ab, but ab cannot handle testing of mixed URLs, which would be more realistic since a website will contain a mixture of resource types. Nevertheless, I did run Apache ab as well to get a sense of its numbers. There are some numbers, hitting the WordPress main index page.

  Apache Apache Nginx Nginx
  C=4 C=8 C=4 C=8
Requests per sec 2.56 2.64 2.61 2.63
Mean time per request (ms) 1564 3003 1530 3040
Transfer rate (kB/s) 105.3 108.6 107.46 108.19
50% of requests served in (ms) 1504 3004 1504 3018
90% of requests served in (ms) 1774 3174 1576 3187
100% of requests served in (ms) 2068 3934 2139 3610

The test were done with concurrency of 4 and 8. I didn’t go for too many, because realistically my website wouldn’t get all that busy.

You see again from the above table that the difference between Apache and Nginx seems rather negligible.

The Nginx tested is version 1.9.12. It’s the latest. Both Apache and Nginx have Google’s Pagespeed module installed. I used the binary package provided for Apache. On Nginx, there’s no package available, so I built Nginx with Pagespeed myself, with this patch to fix some bug with multiple Vary headers being erroneously emitted.

I do find some benefits with Nginx. FIrst, it has HTTP2 support. Apache has it from 2.4.17, but it’s not in any CentOS package repo. HTTP2 has real benefits. I benchmarked on a real Chrome browser. Nginx with HTTP2 was sending pages faster to Chrome than Apache could. HTML page was fully received in 1.5 s on average with Nginx, versus 2 s with Apache. The webpage with all resources gets delivered in 2.6 s with Nginx, verus 3.2 with Apache. Good, Nginx is fast. However, on closer scrutiny, it turns out all the speed advantage basically comes from quicker connection setup. That’s basically a benefit of HTTP2, not of Nginx per se.

It seems to be that whether Apache or Nginx, the web servers themselves aren’t very different. The problem is in other features that I want.

I want Google Pagespeed. It’s really useful in improving content delivery performance, particularly when you’re working with other software and can’t control HTML output by hand.
HTTP2 seems to offer real benefits. Any modern website ought to adopt it now.
So now I’m in a sort of dilemma. I try as hard as possible not to compile stuffs by hand. I can do it if I need, but I prefer not to. It’s tiring to keep stuffs up-to-date. If I want Pagespeed, Apache offers me the advantage of not having to compile stuff by hand. But Apache won’t do HTTP2, not unless I get version 2.4.17 or later, which probably means I have to compile by myself anyway, and that’s precisely what I want to avoid.

There is a Nginx package repo available, up-to-date with version 1.9.12 at this time. HTTP2 is in there. The problem here is that Pagespeed for Nginx needs to be built from source.

CentOS is not going to move ahead with the Apache version. That’s how it is with enterprise Linux distros. I dislike Ubuntu, but I’m spying that their next 16.04 LTS release appears to include Apache 2.4.17. The current Ubuntu 15.10 does not. So I’ve got no solution with Ubuntu either. 16.04 won’t be that long a wait though.

Decisions, decisions.

At time of this writing, I have Nginx running. Built from source, so that I can get Pagespeed.

I think the surprising take-away for me is that Nginx is practically not faster than Apache, HTTP2 aside.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
PeerSpot user
Network Engineer & Web Developer at OneTexh
Vendor
It is open source and OS independent so it is best to use apahe as web server.

Apache Web Server Apache
Advantages
Now a days Apache web server is the most vibrant and vivacious open source web server throughout the world. However its counterpart web servers like Drupal and Magneto are also being used simultaneously but still the growth rate of Apache in organizational websites lags behind the counterpart web servers.
The reason that why Apache is for the most part being used, lies in the fact that it has compatibility with all operating systems including Linux and windows etc. Apache HTTP Server Project is a collaborative effort of software development that focuses on a solid implementation of the code, create commercial quality, with many features and freely available source of an HTTP (Web).
Really the only thing new in its new version (2.2.22) is security patches, but heals the web server, which makes it more convenient for the operating system. So the more script tasks of the operating system, the server can be pushed.
The GUI of Apache is friendly, cooperative and very basic. You have the menu on your left side panel and can access the features with meantime. Another exciting feature which really catches the eye (for developer) is its command line interface.
Apache can configurable from the third party module. It is mostly used for the HTTP server request and responses. It can be customized by different API module.
Disadvantage
Although Apache has not any single cons but one can say that for the beginner, if problem occur then the only solution is to use command line interface to get rid of. But we should know that Apache has pre-defined bug fixer to handle most of the problem on its own.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
it_user3870 - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Manager of Engineering with 1,001-5,000 employees
Vendor
A great web server to start hosting your web sites

Valuable Features:

Depending on what operating system you are using, you can have a website up in no time using Apache web server. Very easy to install on multiple platforms.90% of our web servers are using Apache, I like the fact that there is no management interface, so that we can minimize system resources when it comes to large scale deployments.As Apache is opensource the community is great when it comes to documentation and troubleshooting problems.

Room for Improvement:

If Apache master the ability of hosting websites/web apps that use Microsoft's .Net framework then it will definitely be the best web server to use.Internally we have both Microsoft IIS web servers and Apache web servers. We only use IIS for web sites that are developed in .net, for any other website written in php, perl, java (also many more) we use Apache.For anyone who is looking to host websites or proxy servers, I advise you to use Apache, also there's no cost - only for the hardware of the machine that you are running it from.

Other Advice:

From experience I have found that Apache runs smoothly and a lot faster on Ubuntu.
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
it_user3870 - PeerSpot reviewer
it_user3870Senior Manager of Engineering with 1,001-5,000 employees
Vendor

Hi Imran,

Yes you can use php for IIS but I wouldn't advise it, I have had sites written in php running on IIS, however php parsing is a lot slower on IIS than apache.

Also I have to disagree about the point of security, there are a lot more vulnerabilities on Windows then on Linux. Any website can be fully secure if you always have an up to date system that is locked down.

Wissam

See all 2 comments
it_user1020 - PeerSpot reviewer
Head of Data Center at a tech company with 51-200 employees
Vendor
Clearly one of the best open-source products for running web servers. Our web server of choice for running web servers for more than 7 years and counting.

Valuable Features:

The Apache Web Server is our software of choice for running our web servers for the past seven (7) years. It's clearly one of the best open-source projects in world, as its continuing existence and use is a testament to how great this software is.There have been numerous web server software that has come out in the recent years like Nginx and lhttpd, but the Apache web server has remained as the web server of choice for a lot of organizations world-wide.What I like about the Apache Web Server is that it just simply works. It's very easy to set-up and configure, and you can have a website up in a few minutes. Furthermore, it supports a lot of web scripting languages which even made it more popular.

Room for Improvement:

The only thing that gives me a frown about the Apache Web Server is the command-line configuration. Though it can be configured via web control panels like webmin, you really have to dig deep into the configuration files to really make apache work.The Apache Web Server is undoubtedly one of the best web server software in the world. What's even better is that it's free and remains free even after years of existing. Truly one of the most successful open-source projects ever.

Other Advice:

For simple websites, the Apache web server is easy to install and configure. It can even be configured with web hosting panels. However, configuring the Apache web server from the command line is recommended for complex applications like virtual hosting.
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
it_user1068 - PeerSpot reviewer
it_user1068Tech Support Staff at a tech company with 51-200 employees
Vendor

Although our data center is still young (just more than a year old), it is doing great. Apache was the only option for us at the time of implementation. With no previous experience, it was not a walk in the park for us when doing the configuration. However, we succeeded to complete the configuration successfully and got our servers up and up. I would recommend Apache to anyone. Despite the initial hurdles with configuration, our servers have been efficient and effective up-to-date.

See all 2 comments
it_user1104 - PeerSpot reviewer
Data Center Expert at a tech company with 51-200 employees
Vendor
One of the best open source web servers which is widely used over the internet

Valuable Features:

The Software is free. A few important features in the long list include: stability - it's continuously supported by the open source community, reducing the bugs and errors. portability - Apache is available for multiple OS Customizability - custom modules can be built easily. Efficient handling of client requests. Most popular webserver on the internet.

Room for Improvement:

No support is available from Apache software foundation. Apache needs fine tuning of its components when in a larger environment, otherwise it can make your server unresponsive.

Other Advice:

The webserver survey showed by netcraft [netcraft.com] says, "Apache is still the most widely used [61%] webserver in the world of internet." Apache is designed in such a way that different components of the system can be connected together easily. The beauty is that you can replace or add a component or feature without affecting the system. Apache is a powerful tool with which you can make it do just about anything you need. As there are multiple masterminds taking caring of Apache, it will remain the king of webservers for long!
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
it_user4401 - PeerSpot reviewer
it_user4401Developer at a transportation company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Vendor

I would like to add some more pros that Apache Web Server has:
Apache has useful features, including implementation of the latest protocols.
The admistration is easy, because the configuration files are in ASCII, have a simple format, and can be edited using any text editor.
It is extensible, because Apache server and API source code are open to public. If there is any feature that the user wants but does not exist in Apache, he can write his own server module to implement it.
It is reliable because when any bugs are found, they are often quickly communicated, and rapidly fixed. Updates are made and announced thereafter.
Apache is efficient, because a lot of effort has been put into optimizing the Apache's C code for performance.

Buyer's Guide
Download our free Application Infrastructure Report and find out what your peers are saying about Apache, Microsoft, Zend, and more!
Updated: September 2022
Product Categories
Application Infrastructure
Buyer's Guide
Download our free Application Infrastructure Report and find out what your peers are saying about Apache, Microsoft, Zend, and more!