On Mon, 26 Apr 2004, Andrew Payne wrote:
> For those that look to Apache: Apache never had a well-established
> incumbent (Oracle), an a well-funded upstart competitor (MySQL). Rob
> McCool's NCSA httpd (and later, Apache) were good enough and developed
> rapidly enough that they prevented any other HTTP server projects from
> getting critical mass.
This is a followup to my previous message where I mentioned apache, but
did not really followup on it.
While Apache is and has been wildly popular for bulk hosing and domain
parking, for serious commercial use, Netscape's enterprise server, now Sun
One, has long been a leader in commercial web sites. That has now changed
too. While Netscape's server was pretty good, it is simply harder to
configure, not as versatile as apache, and not as reliable or as fast
nowadays. This was not always the case. There was a time when its
performance was considered to be much better than apache (I'm thinking
about apache 1.3.4 or so) and apache configuration was a black art few
understood. with modern gui tools for configuring apache, and the
incredible performance gains the late model 1.3 versions and now 2.0.x
versions have, it is quickly displacing the more expensive netscape.
Apache did not start in first place when it comes to "enterprise" class
web servers, no matter how many small personal web sites ran on it. Most
commercial companies didn't use it at first. It too had to "earn its
stripes" over time and by proving it was better. Now I know people who
think Open Source is just so much pie in the sky hand waving philosophical
candy who think apache and jboss are the bomb. they'll come around on
PostgreSQL too, once someone with some foresight points out the advantages
it has. and one of its advantages is that it doesn't have a large
monolithic organization driving development.
