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."The solution's most valuable feature is reporting."
"It's very stable, and it hosts one of the biggest of many biggest web applications in the world."
"The best thing about Apache is that it is open-source, so implementing my platform on-premises is less expansive than other solutions."
"It is more secure to use Apache and you will have fewer problems than other web services."
"The product's initial setup phase is straightforward."
"It's reliable, configurable and generally secure."
"Most of the features I liked were related to the performance during peak hours."
"Its community is its most valuable feature. Solving problems is easier on Apache because so many people know this product."
"Microsoft Platform is the only viable solution when I wish to do something that is not supposed to be cross-platform."
"The most valuable features are the Domain Controller and the WBFS Manager."
"Microsoft .NET Framework reduces the cost of entry and enables the development of applications with mature and enterprise features, thereby lowering the entry barriers."
"The solution is easy to use."
"The addition of generics to handle common functionality across types, and the more recent upgrade of the dataset to the Entity Framework, has cut development time drastically, while increasing quality and confidence between builds."
"Basically, .NET is simply is the easiest programming language to use, based on my experience."
"The .NET Framework is a very good framework. It does what I need it to do."
"The solution is easy to use if the user is a developer or some technical person."
"The interface has room for improvement."
"So far, for us, everything is okay."
"Lacks integration with some cloud solutions."
"The product's initial setup process could be easier for users."
"Things change very fast. We're always on the lookout for better approaches and tools. If the solution falls behind, we may have to switch."
"The major issue occurs with ports. So, I would like to see easier port management."
"I want the user interface to be more user-friendly."
"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."
"Needs stronger security with respect to cloud issues."
"The .NET open source community could be larger."
"The product could have a better framework for application development."
"In my opinion, this solution can be improved by providing out-of-the-box support for different types of libraries."
"Microsoft .NET Framework has a steep learning curve, which could be improved."
"I would like more web integration."
"If AI could be incorporated in Microsoft .NET Framework it would be helpful."
"The initial setup is complex."
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.