Slashdot Mirror
Netcraft: Microsoft Closing In On Apache Web Server Lead
angry tapir sends this IDG report:
"After almost two decades of trailing the market leader, Microsoft's Web server software is coming close to rivaling the dominance of the Apache Web server, according to the latest Netcraft survey of Internet infrastructure. May saw an additional 9 million sites using Microsoft Web server software, increasing the company's share of the Web by 0.37 percent. In the same period, Apache's market share fell by 0.18 percent, despite gaining an additional 4.3 million sites. Microsoft is now just 4.1 percentage points behind Apache, which, as the most popular Web server software on the Internet, now powers about 37.6 percent of all sites."
Netcraft confirms it!
How many of those sites are actual web servers and how many of those web servers are in a cluster serving a single site?
Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
It is now official. Netcraft has confirmed: Apache is dying
One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered Apache community when IDC confirmed that Apache market share has dropped yet again, now down to less than a fraction of 1 percent of all servers. Coming on the heels of a recent Netcraft survey which plainly states that Apache has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. Apache is collapsing in complete disarray, as fittingly exemplified by failing dead last in the recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test.
You don't need to be the Amazing Kreskin to predict Apache's future. The hand writing is on the wall: Apache faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for Apache because Apache is dying. Things are looking very bad for Apache. As many of us are already aware, Apache continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood.
Probably because a lot of us jumped ship from Apache to Nginx. I got tired of my server eating up all the CPU for what little my sites were doing. Moved to Nginx and freed up 75%, and I wasn't doing anything special server-side to account for that.
Haven't we covered this before? And wasn't the gain mostly attributed to "parked domains", rather than actual, working web sites?
Microsoft is behind apache AND nginx for the top million busiest sites, nginx appearing to gain more than apache lost.
---- MISSING MISCELLANEOUS DATA SEGMENT --- [sigdash] trolololol
Didn't Microsoft pay someone (godaddy?) to get a very significant number of parked domains moved to Microsoft's web server software in the past year or so?
Microsoft is closing the gap, based on what are mostly static, content-free pages. When only active sites are considered, Microsoft is third, behind Apache and nginx. Also, Microsoft's share of the million busiest sites has been in an almost linear decline for years and is also third behind Apache and nginx
The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
This as usual is all wrong from slashdot
There are more ADCs (application delivery controllers), or for the less informed - loadbalancers with L7 smarts. When the loadbalancer works at L7 the big 2 (f5 and netscaler) both look like a microsoft server. They are a full reverse proxy that speak their own HTTP . They arn't a microsoft server and usually have lunix behind them. Lets list a few sites with F5 or netscaler sitting in front... facebook.com, apple.com, amazon.com should i go on?
Please mod parent up.
What a load of PR bullshit this article is. If people actually care reading the netcraft results [1], you will see that in ACTIVE WEBSITES the Microsoft webserver is falling below 12% during the last two years, while Apache has been well over 50%, despite all other webservers gaining place (Nginx for example).
[1] http://news.netcraft.com/archi...
I once lived in the heart of the US auto industry. Anonymous tin-box Chevy and Ford cars ruled the roads by shear numbers. Not many people remember these high volume cars, the Vega, Maverick, Nova, Fairlane, Granada, Chevette. And the Pinto is only well remembered due to an engineering oversight which made it a mobile crematorium.
So Microsoft has higher numbers, yeah? So who is using these things? Quick and dirty websites or real e-commerce, media, commercial/industrial?
Numbers alone aren't very meaningful.
We demand, lies, damned lies and statistics
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
FreeBSD is finally .. wait, what?
From TFA [1]:
Apache's position is much stronger when considering only Active Sites — it retains an absolute majority of 52.3%, and second place is held by nginx (14.4%), rather than Microsoft (11.3%). By excluding much of the automatically-generated content present on the internet, the Active Sites metric better reflects web server market share amongst human-maintained web sites. (emphasis by me)
[1] http://news.netcraft.com/archi...
Microsoft has been growing steadily against apache for a few reasons that are important to keep into perspective:
1. Park Webs: these are domain parking spaces that exist to sell targeted advertising in a users domain name until they change the DNS for the domain or add content in a shared/dedicated hosting environment. GoDaddy parkweb is exclusively Microsoft IIS for example as are many others as Parkwebs are static pages that dont need to be policed for vulnerability as, say, wordpress lamp stacks might. Its no skin off registrars and hosting providers backs to convert their parkwebs to IIS and usually microsoft will license it and do it for free or in GoDaddys case, pay them to switch to Microsoft IIS.
2.competitors: Nginx for example approaches near 20% marketshare. Its faster in some cases than apache and for many admins, easier to maintain.
the marketshare for active sites, not just all sites, is what is important (netcraft realized what microsoft was doing early on and should be commended for their countermeasure.) and when we consider that metric, Apache is still nearly 5 times more prevalent than IIS. Even Nginx beats out IIS in both the active and top busiest sites surveyed so when we take that into account, Microsoft is closing in on Apaches lead in much the same way a Windstar minivan closes in on a Ducati.
Good people go to bed earlier.
Haven't read the article yet, but I'm guessing that M$'s increase is due to building server farms & data centers. The Apache foundation doesn't do that. If that's the reason for M$'s increase, then Apache's absolutely fine. Ok, now I'm off to read.... hopefully the article answers this point.
Which one probably has more NSA backdoors?
Most of the "benefit" of Nginx is that it forces noatime, whether you like it or not. Noatime can make a big difference in performance, but just set noatime in /etc/fstab and you'll get the same performance from Apache, without the Nginx bugs, and Apache will ACTUALLY behave as it's documentation says it does.
The other thing that makes a difference, largely in RAM usage, is that some distributions ship a default Apache config with almost every possible module enabled. Comment out mod_speling, mod_userdir, mod_webdav etc for better performance and reduced memory usage.
New gig, all the docs are in SharePoint, have been for 5 years, and it's impossible to find anything, but if you do it's outdated. No bother, I'm making up new standards and procedure, and it's all written up in Markdown and getting checked into git/gitlab for easy viewing/editing by anyone.
fak3r.com
This same exact article and topic comes up every year, I sure do hope that Microsoft pays Netcraft enough money to lose all of the credibility they have to rebuild each year posting this drivel.
Last year was the same thing. I really hate to drive up their page hits just to refute their claims and I'm guessing that's why they say this shit. "Market share of active sites" this year is identical to last year and a true indicator. Somehow though, Netcraft claims Microsoft is gaining ground because pages that are never hosted are being developed for servers that do not exist. It has boggled the mind for several years, but now it's obvious. Do not go look at their garbage to give them a spike in page views.
Next year I refuse to look, and hope you do to. Piece of shit companies making blatantly false claims should simply die by the road side. Netcraft has continually made themselves nothing but a giant Microsoft sock puppet.
If you need a reason not to look this is what they state right after a false claim that MS is hosting 11 million new sites. All may not be as it seems, however, as the web server is still sending an X-Powered-By: Apache/2.4.9 (Win64) header. The web server is also reporting X-Powered-By: ARR/2.5, indicating the use of IIS's load-balancing features. It is likely that Apache Lounge is powered by multiple Apache instances which are hidden behind a Microsoft IIS load balancer. So they don't even trust their numbers, but fuck it.. they can turn a quick buck trying to turn you into a sucker.
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.