There is also a follow up article written by one of the httpd developers about 'What Apache brings to the table.' The article cites community, experience, legal framework, diversity, brand strength, and networking as reasons why developers and companies should consider bringing their projects over to Apache."
Two words why you shouldn't use Apache unless you absolutely need to (and most apache users don't NEED apache): configuration complexity.
Apache's configuration file hasn't changed dramatically since
Yes, Apache (Web server) is somewhat hard to configure. There's a large file with a lot of (documented) features and settings, and a lot of ways to go wrong there. On the other hand, Apache is incredibly flexible: You can use it as a proxy, it does ssl, it fronts for Java Web servers, it rewrites URLs, it authenticates, it slices, it dices and I'm probably just scratching the surface.
Someone who knows his way around the config file - and that's really the only crucial thing to know about Apache - is able to
On the other hand, Apache is incredibly flexible: You can use it as a proxy, it does ssl, it fronts for Java Web servers, it rewrites URLs, it authenticates, it slices, it dices and I'm probably just scratching the surface.
You're exactly right, and your parent poster is exactly wrong. Attention, Please, Everyone:
EASE OF USE DOES NOT INDICATE A BETTER PRODUCT.
Apache is incredibly powerful. There's a reason it's the most popular webserver in use today, by far. And, with most linux distros, it's relatively
On the other hand, there's no need for apache to be quite so hard to configure, or to have such inconsistent configuration syntax, etc etc. As others have noticed in this thread, go back to Why I Hate The Apache Web Server [slashdot.org] for a nice list of many of the precise stupidities.
configuring apache #1 complaint, still unaddressed (Score:2, Interesting)
Two words why you shouldn't use Apache unless you absolutely need to (and most apache users don't NEED apache): configuration complexity.
Apache's configuration file hasn't changed dramatically since
Configuration complexity (Score:5, Insightful)
On the other hand, Apache is incredibly flexible: You can use it as a proxy, it does ssl, it fronts for Java Web servers, it rewrites URLs, it authenticates, it slices, it dices and I'm probably just scratching the surface.
Someone who knows his way around the config file - and that's really the only crucial thing to know about Apache - is able to
Re:Configuration complexity (Score:5, Insightful)
On the other hand, Apache is incredibly flexible: You can use it as a proxy, it does ssl, it fronts for Java Web servers, it rewrites URLs, it authenticates, it slices, it dices and I'm probably just scratching the surface.
You're exactly right, and your parent poster is exactly wrong. Attention, Please, Everyone:
EASE OF USE DOES NOT INDICATE A BETTER PRODUCT.
Apache is incredibly powerful. There's a reason it's the most popular webserver in use today, by far. And, with most linux distros, it's relatively
Re:Configuration complexity (Score:2)