IIS Reviews

We are using .net website on this solution. It's great for our website hosting. All custom web pages and websites we develop are on it. 

For all of our custom pages, websites, and web applications, we use this. 

It's very handy to restart the back pages and restart the website engine. 

It's very easy to publish. 

The product has very good integration with firewalls. 

It allows port mapping and page mapping.

The product can allow for translation and certification binding.

It has multiple good, useful features.

The solution is easy to set up. 

Technical support is good.

It can scale well.

We'd like future versions to be more stable. 

It would be useful if they could incorporate some default security controls. These are missing right now. 

We've used the solution for 15 years. 

We would prefer if the solution improved the level of stability on offer. 

So far, the solution has been quite scalable. 

We are moving towards different apps and setups and by default, we'll need more IIS, so we are in the process of increasing usage. We'll need to increase the workload on our side.

The technical support has been quite helpful and responsive. It's pretty good.

The initial setup process is very straightforward and simple. It is not overly complex. 

We've used both on-premises and cloud deployments. 

We have witnessed an ROI.

The product is a default component on servers. We didn't have to pay any initial cost.

We are using the latest version of the solution. 

If you would like to host your websites internally, this is a good tool that gets the job done.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten. 

Regarding the use cases of IIS in our organization, we use it for our web-based in-house applications.

Feature-wise, I would say that it is easily configurable with the development tools of Microsoft.

It lacks a few performance improvement tools. So, performance improvement tools need to be included in the tool so that they can improve the product overall.

I have been using IIS for twenty years. Since I have used the solution for a long time, I can say that I have used all the versions.

IIS is a stable solution. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

IIS is a scalable solution. Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

While IIS is used directly by only five users, the applications are used by more than two hundred people. Also, we plan to increase the number of users using the solution in our organization.

Considering my experience with this solution, the initial setup for the solution was okay for me. In short, the initial setup was easy.

Even though I don't remember clearly, the time taken for the deployment process was not more than thirty minutes. Also, the deployment process is something which I can do by myself.

Regarding the steps involved in the deployment process, one has to install Windows Server and then add the components of IIS into it. After this process, one can configure the solution as per their requirements.

I didn't need to get an additional license for the solution since it was included in my server.

In our organization, since our development process required IIS only, we did not evaluate other options in the market.

I definitely recommend IIS to those planning to use it in the future. The deployment process for the solution is easy, and for help, one can refer to the documentation available for the solution. Overall, I rate the solution a ten out of ten.

We use IIS for anything from the digital front doors to web-based applications for health care.

The most valuable feature of IIS is that it's free, and it works.

I have used it for so long, I don't think that I would improve anything about it.

It would be beneficial if you could automate security certificate monitoring with IIS.

I have been working with IIS for 20 years.

We are using the most recent version.

It's a solid product. There are alternatives, but they are all equal.

I would rate IIS an eight out of ten.

We use IIS to deploy some of Opentext applications that we need to deploy.

The most valuable feature of IIS is it does not consume a lot of resources. It does not consume a lot of resources, such as memory.

IIS could improve by having some features related to URL rewrite, ARR (Application Request Routing) and HTTPS certificate generation.

I have been using IIS for approximately five years.

IIS is highly stable.

The scalability of IIS is good. It can be scaled easily using Cluster.

We have less than five people using the solution in my company.

I did not use the support from IIS.

We purchased a Microsoft Windows license and the license for IIS came in the package.

We are using this solution because it was recommended for us to use. It is a stable solution.

My advice to others is this is a simple-to-use solution and you can find items with ease. Microsoft has good support for its solutions. You can find the information you need from around the world because Microsoft solutions are widely used. If there are problems you can fix them easily from the support online, such as in forums.

I rate IIS a nine out of ten.

IIS's most valuable feature is user-friendliness. 

The tool needs to improve its performance. 

I have been using the product for five to ten years. 

IIS is stable. 

The tool's technical support is good. 

IIS's deployment is straightforward. It can completed in an hour. 

IIS's deployment can be completed in-house. 

IIS's pricing is not expensive. 

I rate the overall product an eight out of ten. 

We use the solution for our customer's web applications. 

IIS needs to improve its security. Its support needs to be faster and clear. The tool's licensing could be cheaper as well. 

I have been using the IIS for 15-20 years. 

My company has 200 users for IIS. 

The tool's setup is simple. 

We did not use a consultant for the product's setup. 

IIS is expensive. 

I would rate IIS a seven out of ten. 

We use the solution to build web-based applications and platforms.

The solution is easy to use.

The solution's scalability needs improvement.

It is reasonably stable.

The solution's scalability could be better.

The solution's initial setup process is straightforward.

If you're looking for a scalable solution, look at alternatives other than IIS. But it serves the purpose if you're looking for a small to medium solution. I rate it an eight.

IIS is useful for the deployment of web applications.

There aren't any particular features I found valuable since it is just used for deployment purposes.

Performance-wise, certain improvements in IIS are needed.

I have been using IIS for not more than a year now. I also sell IIS.

Its stability is good. People use it widely to host their on-premises applications, like, internal applications on IIS.

It is scalable if we include the application stack. IIS is not scalable. Its scalability is less. If we talk about its scalability with respect to the cloud, as we are seeing as of now, it's not that much scalable. We need to put some extra effort into making it scalable. Almost everyone who has a Windows server uses the solution for hosting their internal applications.

The solution's initial setup is a little complex, especially compared to what others provide. It is better than Apache.

If there are no issues, the solution's deployment can be done in an hour or two maximum. Two people are required for the deployment and maintenance of the solution. Also, it depends on the size of the infrastructure and the servers and everything. The requirement for the infrastructure is not that big. So two people are more than enough. One is the administrator, and the other one is the developer. But if there is a lot of development, then the people required for deployment and maintenance would depend on the size of the application.

The cost for IIS is already included in Windows services. We don't have to pay anything extra. We only pay for the Windows server.

I would tell those planning to use the solution depending on their requirement. If the requirement is for on-premises and in an isolated environment, then people install it on the server and start using it. But if the requirement is to go on the cloud and make the website public, then it is preferable to opt for the cloud.

I rate the overall solution an eight out of ten.