IIS Reviews

The primary use case is mainly using the IIS service to host web applications so that these applications can be accessed from outside through a web server. 

I think that the IIS includes most features that are required by web applications so that they can run smoothly on Windows operating system. And since it is a native service from Microsoft that is part of the Windows Server ecosystem, so performance is good, and compatibility with the operating system also is excellent. The integration also is great with the operating system, and the integration with other Windows Server roles and applications.

When you are working with Microsoft solutions, you will see that the integration with the operating system, and implementing some security features, are easier in IIS than when using another solution. For example, if you want to use single authentication, SSO, or single sign-on, by authenticating yourself with your Windows username and password, when you are logging in to your computer, the IIS can use these credentials to automatically authenticate you in the application without the need to write or to type again your username or password. This is the SSO, the single sign-on, you can implement it quickly and easily in IIS since it is natively developed to work with Windows operating system. You only need to implement the SSO in your application. And once you develop this module and integrate it into your application, you can easily use it with the IIS within Windows.

Sometimes if you are using IIS in large-scale scenarios, meaning that if you are deploying an application within IIS service and you are expecting a large number of users to use this application, you can sometimes find some problems, meaning that the service can shut down by itself unexpectedly if you don't configure your IIS with the correct configuration that can handle this number of users.

Some configurations are not that easy to configure, there are a lot of details that you need to specify to tweak your applications. Sometimes, you can find problems, especially with applications that are not developed with .NET languages. If you want your application to perform well and can handle a large number of users, you need to use .NET languages like ASP.NET or other .NET technology. But if you are using for example PHP application, sometimes you can find some performance issues.

I encountered that type of problem, especially when you are using, for example, applications that are not developed in the Windows environment and you want to deploy this application with the IIS, sometimes you will find problems, especially performance-related problems.

Frankly, I have been using the solution since 2010. And am still using it when we want to deploy web applications and you want to use a web server. So the IIS is a role within the Windows Server operating system that you can activate to use the web service in the operating system.

It's not about stability, but it's more about compatibility. Meaning that, if you are using Microsoft technology, you won't find better than IIS. But if you are using other programming language technologies that aren't Microsoft technologies, you can find yourself facing these kinds of issues. Especially if your application wasn't developed to fully work with IIS. So sometimes you can find this problem, this problem can be caused by the development process of this application. But sometimes even though you will take into consideration the compatibility problem, the IIS won't perform well with other technologies that are not Microsoft.

The solution is scalable. You can have as many servers that host IIS so that they can handle the connections from users. And this is where the Failover Cluster service is used, it is used to create a cluster of services so that you can make your service scalable and available.

For Microsoft, if you subscribe for example, to the premium subscription plan, and it depends on the level or the urgency of the ticket or the incident, they will contact you sometimes within the hour if it's a critical problem. But if it's just a simple support ticket, sometimes within 24. It's less than 48 hours before they will call you. It depends on if you want them to assist you by phone or by email. And their support is really great, sometimes they can find the problem within minutes. Yeah, I think it's great.

Frankly, we are using other web server applications like the Apache web server. It depends on the application, and how or what web service application it was developed. If it was developed to be used with the IIS, then we use IIS for that application. If this application was developed for Apache or another web service, then we will install this webserver to run the application. Most of the time when it is a PHP web application, then we will use the Apache web server rather than the IIS. But if it's ASP.NET or another .NET technology, then we will use IIS. Or if we are using, for example, another solution from Microsoft, such as SharePoint or Microsoft Exchange mail servers, et cetera, then we will be forced to use the IIS service. Sometimes, you don't have a choice to choose. If it's a Microsoft solution you want to deploy, you will be forced to use IIS. If it's in-house developed application or you buy a product that needs a web server, then you can choose, but it depends also on the compatibility list of the application.

The initial setup is straightforward. It doesn't take much time. It's Windows, it's Microsoft stuff, and with Microsoft, it's about making the installation process easier, you cannot find an easier installation than Microsoft products. It's a role within the Windows Server, so with a number of clicks, you will find yourself ready to use the IIS service.

The implementation was completed in-house. 

Sometimes, I deploy it by myself, and sometimes when another department needs visual machines with Windows Server and the IIS service, I can either install everything by myself or provide them with the virtual machines and the access information credential, et cetera. And the company that will deploy the application for them, it'll be the one that will install the role and configure it.

I think it's part of the Windows Server, so you won't have any other costs to add in order to use the IIS service. Meaning that, if you have a license for Windows Server, then automatically you will have also the IIS service available.

I give the solution eight out of ten.

The IIS service version also depends on the version of the Windows Server. So for example, if you are using the Windows Server 2012, it may have an old version compared to the 2022 Windows Server version. It is the last one since we are also using the 2022 Windows Server operating system, so we are using the latest version 6.0.

Most of the time, if it's me who deployed or installed IIS in the first place, I am the one who will maintain it. But if it's another person or another company or its part of the maintenance program, then we will call the other company to do their maintenance tasks.

In my experience, I think that if you want to use IIS, you need to develop your application to be fully compatible with IIS. Meaning that, you need to use Microsoft technologies rather than other languages, for example, Java or PHP or other, Python or anything else. Rather than that them, you need to choose .NET technologies so that you will take advantage of the performance and compatibility of the system with your application. This is what I can recommend people to do in order to use IIS. Because when for example, you acquire an application or a solution that wasn't developed initially for IIS, you need to do many tweaks in the applications and the IIS in order to make it run. And sometimes these types of tweaks can cause you problems in the production environment.

I mainly use IIS to support web applications.

IIS's best features are its management console and stability.

IIS's memory management could be improved.

I've been using IIS for over ten years.

IIS is very stable.

IIS's scalability is good.

Microsoft's technical support is good.

Previously, I used Apache, but it wasn't stable enough.

The initial setup was very easy.

I would rate IIS nine out of ten.

The solution is used to install and run applications on the server. It's similar to web servers. We host our internal applications on it.

We can have full control of the server from the configuration to the OS. The product is flexible. It provides much more flexibility than the cloud.

The security must be improved.

I have been using the solution since 2003.

The tool is very stable.

The scalability depends on the hardware. We have five users in our organization. We will eventually increase the usage.

It is very easy to deploy the tool. It took us 20 minutes to deploy it. The deployment process is very easy. We just need to prepare the installation and run it on the server.

The solution can be deployed in-house. We do not need any assistance.

ROI is good.

We have moved to the cloud. We must assess the vulnerabilities of the server. Then, we must perform the server hardening procedure of Windows. The impact of the product on our strategies depends on our use cases. The performance depends on the hardware. Generally, the tool performs well. Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

We use the product for our web applications.

The product is easy to configure. It has a lot of good features.

The solution must improve the integration between its databases. It should also improve the definition of IP addresses and ports for connection.

I have been using the solution for more than ten years.

I rate the tool’s stability more than eight out of ten.

Compared to other web application services, IIS has better scalability. We have many different programs. A part of our customers use the solution.

The initial setup is a little complex. Even if we make a little mistake, the configuration still works well.

We need three networking personnel to maintain the product.

We pay a yearly licensing fee for the solution.

I look for network administration aspects in the product. A software person might have a different perspective. I did not configure the solution. My friends configured it. When my friends have a problem, I help them to solve it. IIS is related to software engineers and programmers. IIS is the best solution. Its services are better than other products. Overall, I rate the tool more than eight out of ten.

We are using the platform for automatic web services.

The platform is easy to manage.

The platform's stability could be better.

I have been using IIS for a few years. At present, we are the latest version.

I rate the platform's stability an eight out of ten. It could be improved.

We have 2,000 IIS users in our organization. It is a scalable platform.

The platform's technical support services are satisfactory.

The initial setup is simple. It does not take too long to set up.

The platform generates a good return on investment.

IIS's pricing is reasonable.

I recommend IIS to others and rate it a nine out of ten.

I use IIS to publish our website internally. It helps me to publish information about the teams and provides flexible communication.

IIS is easy to configure in terms of websites and other solutions.

I would like to see NLB features in IIS.

I have been using this solution for 20 years.

For stability, I would give a rating of nine out of ten.

I would rate the scalability at ten out of ten.

I would rate Microsoft's technical support at ten out of ten.

Positive

The initial setup is easy.

We have seen an ROI. We have been able to purchase the solution at a good price and implement it easily. It has been working fine for us.

The price is good.

I recommend IIS because it's simple, easy to configure and implement, and has good technical support. Overall, I would rate IIS at nine on a scale from one to ten.

The solution is an operating system for our servers. We have other applications running on it. 

I like the availability.

It's good and offers good usability.

The solution has been issue free.

It's stable and very reliable.

The solution scales well.

The setup is straightforward and quite simple. 

The cost is a bit too high.

There is a bit of complexity, and we'd like to make sure that in the future, it's streamlined and easier in general. 

I've used the solution for one year.

I'd rate the stability ten out of ten. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It is reliable. 

We have ten to 20 users currently using it. It is scalable. We do have a plan to increase usage, although I'm not sure of the exact plan.

It's a bit expensive and therefore not extensively used. 

I've never contacted technical support. I can't speak to how helpful or responsive they would be. 

I did not previously use a different solution. This is the first tool of its kind that I have used. 

It is straightforward to set up. We managed to deploy it in two to three weeks. We were able to migrate all the platforms over without issue. The architecture must be clear, and if that's the case, you don't have any issues. 

We managed the setup ourselves in-house. We did not need any outside assistance from integrators or consultants while handling the implementation process. 

I have not witnessed any ROI while using the solution. 

The solution is expensive. We pay for the solution yearly. I'm not sure if there are also extra costs on top of the main licensing cost.

I am using the latest version of the solution. 

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten. New users wouldn't have an issue with the product. It's a good choice. 

I use the solution to maintain the web application by updating the port, DNS name, and date.

The solution's stability needs improvement.

I have been using the solution for two months.

The solution could be more stable. I rate its stability as a four.

It is a scalable solution. We have around 2,000 solution users.

The solution's initial setup was straightforward.

I deployed the solution with the help of online forums. It took two to three hours.

I rate the solution as a ten out of ten.