Gary F wrote:
Matt, I have to use IIS because I'm very familiar with it (a piece of
cake), it's a known quantity. I'm not familiar with Apache and the
thought of having to learn about its ins and outs and get used to its
config files takes me away from what I ought to be focussing on -
programming web apps! :-)

Well sure, everyone has different needs. Maybe you could start picking up Apache on the side so you're at least familiar with it--it really isn't as daunting as it seems.

IIS7's new architecture is modular and there
are some very nice extensions (e.g. URL rewrite) - which don't require
fiddling with config files.

If you're on Windows/IIS and like where MS is going with IIS, another choice to consider is BD .NET since it has really tight integration with the admin tools for IIS. Yes, this list is for discussing OpenBD but I thought I'd at least mention BD .NET since you brought up some of the features of IIS 7.

Security holes in IIS are automatically patched with Windows Updates.
With Apache I imagine a manual effort must be made to check for
updates and then copy new files over? I run so many servers, they have
to be self-patching.

Different discussion entirely, but of course there's a lot more servers running Apache than IIS in the world, so there are plenty of tools out there to make this job easy. But if you're happy with Windows/IIS you may have no reason to change.

I thought it was going to be easy to choose which CFML engine to use
by weighing up features, but I have been unable to get either OpenBD
or Railo running with IIS so the decision has almost been made for
me. :-(

The other option you might consider is looking into using Tomcat with IIS:
http://tomcat.apache.org/connectors-doc-archive/jk2/jk/iishowto.html

That's a bit dated, but I get the sense integrating Tomcat is a bit more common and well documented than using Jetty with IIS. Realize, however, that in both cases these are open source Java projects so IIS interoperability tends to be low on their list of priorities.

Vince, thanks for pointing out BD JX. With CF9 almost out and the open
source engines steaming ahead with new features I had put JX on our
'maybe' list. Who knows now!

The other thing I'd suggest is make sure you focus on the features you *need* as opposed to an abstract bullet list of features, weigh that against total cost, the sense you get of who you'll get good support from, the costs involved with support, how quickly you think new features will be added if you ask for them, etc. Lots of factors to consider.

Good luck, and let us know if we can help further with your decision.
--
Matthew Woodward
[email protected]
http://www.mattwoodward.com/blog

Please do not send me proprietary file formats such as Word, PowerPoint, etc. as attachments.
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

Reply via email to