We performed a comparison between Apache Web Server and Microsoft .NET Framework based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Infrastructure solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It's very stable, and it hosts one of the biggest of many biggest web applications in the world."
"The product is very cheap and stable."
"Apache Web Server is free of cost."
"The solution offers good security."
"Its community is its most valuable feature. Solving problems is easier on Apache because so many people know this product."
"It is more secure to use Apache and you will have fewer problems than other web services."
"Apache has proven to be incredibly reliable, and everything has operated smoothly without encountering any issues."
"The most significant advantage is the ability to swiftly enable HTTPS services when my DNS is configured correctly."
"Microsoft .NET Framework’s most valuable features are web application development, RESTful services development, security, performance, and less memory footprint."
"Given that it's cross-platform right now, where you can use it on Windows and Mac, that is the single most significant feature that has resulted in wider adoption of .NET."
"The most valuable feature is the financial accounting."
"A great solution for creating program solutions in a framework for Microsoft Windows quickly and easily."
"The most valuable feature of Microsoft .NET Framework is debugging."
"In my opinion, the best thing about Microsoft .NET is the fully featured framework. It provides most of the things which a normal developer requires of any application out of the box."
"The most valuable feature is customization."
"The most valuable features are the Domain Controller and the WBFS Manager."
"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."
"So far, for us, everything is okay."
"By optimizing the infrastructure to allow the webserver to directly handle queries from memory—particularly by prioritizing the storage of queries in memory and processing them through the web server interface—I could potentially cut down the required instances from five hundred to two hundred."
"The product's initial setup process could be easier for users."
"For NGINX, I think it has NGINX Management Suite, which is GUI-based and allows you to manage your configuration via the user interface, but Apache fails to offer such capabilities to users."
"I want the user interface to be more user-friendly."
"The interface has room for improvement."
"Its stability could be better."
"In the realm of Microsoft .NET Framework, particularly in the C# language, there have been significant developments that I find highly commendable. I am genuinely fascinated by the continuous evolution of the language, and staying abreast of the latest features in Azure is both challenging and enjoyable. Working with C# in Azure is particularly fantastic. I appreciate in .NET, as compared to Java, is the enforcement of types, providing a better experience in terms of technicalities. Additionally, the introduction of Roslyn in the past few years has brought about the concept of late .NET, which I find interesting and powerful. This allows for the transformation of symbolic code just before execution, eliminating the runtime decision-making process and enhancing efficiency. However, late .NET does come with a drawback – a delay in the last-minute computation when starting an executable. While some may find this less appealing in terms of instant responsiveness, especially in serverless cloud environments, the efficiency gained from executing strictly binary code is valuable. Despite potential drawbacks like the time required for activation, I view .NET favorably for its technical advancements and efficiency, especially in scenarios such as serverless cloud computing. It's essential to recognize the intricacies of how .NET processes code and the efficiency it brings, which some may overlook."
"The solution could improve by optimizing the memory for better performance."
".NET Is still heavy or dependant on other Microsoft libraries and frameworks."
"Difficult to scale this product for large organizations."
"The solution has difficulty integrating with other products. There are no such difficulties if you have the same platform, hardware, and operating system."
"In the next release, I am looking for more advanced technologies such as socket communication and enhanced features like realtime chat with the clients."
"The integration with DevOps tools, such as Azure DevOps, Jira, and GitLab, would be a valuable addition."
"Improvements are needed in .NET development, particularly in a backend scenario."
Apache Web Server is ranked 3rd in Application Infrastructure with 21 reviews while Microsoft .NET Framework is ranked 4th in Application Infrastructure with 47 reviews. Apache Web Server is rated 8.6, while Microsoft .NET Framework is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Apache Web Server writes "Has good security, speed and traffic handling features ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft .NET Framework writes "Intuitive, easier to develop, maintain, and migrate from the old framework to newer versions". Apache Web Server is most compared with IIS, NGINX Plus, IBM WebSphere Application Server, Zend PHP Engine and IBM DataPower Gateway, whereas Microsoft .NET Framework is most compared with IIS, Magic xpa Application Platform, JBoss Enterprise Application Platform, Windows Process Activation Services and IBM WebSphere Application Server. See our Apache Web Server vs. Microsoft .NET Framework report.
See our list of best Application Infrastructure vendors.
We monitor all Application Infrastructure reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
