Further to Scott's answer, he's right in the fact that Apache is beta for windows, but stable, however the apache group have ALWAYS said that apache2 would be more secure/stable for windows, as it is an entirely new codebase, as opposed to the direct port from *nix to win32. However I'd be dubious as to how stable apache2 would be just now, and would personally stick with 1.3
My 2cents Ross > -----Original Message----- > From: Scott Hurring [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: 10 June 2002 20:25 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [PHP-WIN] Re: Apache 2.0.36 + PHP + Win2000 Server > > > Well, just IMO, i've used PHP/apache on both linux and windows > for almost 2 years now, and i've never had a single problem with > either platform. > > I personally prefer using linux for server jobs and windows for > desktop jobs.... so i don't think i'd ever use windows as a > production server, but I do almost all my development work > on a Win2k machine running mysql/apache/php, i love it :-) > > Apache is still classified "beta" on windows, but from what i've > seen, it's a VERY solid beta. > > -- > Scott Hurring > Systems Programmer > EAC Corporation > scott (*) eac.com > > > "Matt Babineau" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message > 004e01c210b2$bef510f0$6501a8c0@developerx">news:004e01c210b2$bef510f0$6501a8c0@developerx... > > Yeah Scott, that's also what I have been hearing. I am wondering though > > is the PHP support in Apache 1.3 or 2.0 even on Windows the same type of > > support that you would get on a Linux machine? I am not a Linux person > > but I may need to be if I can't get good performance out of Windows. I > > am a Windows person by trade but I am slowly moving towards open source > > primarily because I can develop for free. I also was rading about Apache > > 2.0 and it said that there was no SSL support for it. Does anyone know > > if there is SSL support in Apache v1.3 for windows? > > > > Matt Babineau > > Freelance Internet Developer > > ----------------------------------------- > > e: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > p: 603.943.4237 > > w: http://www.criticalcode.com > > PO BOX 601 > > Manchester, NH 03105 > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Scott Hurring [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 3:09 PM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: [PHP-WIN] Re: Apache 2.0.36 + PHP + Win2000 Server > > > > > > PHP support for Apache2 is still experimental, so i'd go with Apache > > 1.3.x for now. > > > > Most people i hear from say that PHP/apache is much faster > > than PHP/IIS. > > > > "Matt Babineau" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message > > 003101c21097$69822c40$6501a8c0@developerx">news:003101c21097$69822c40$6501a8c0@developerx... > > > Hello all; > > > > > > I am looking into a solution for a company and I want to use PHP. > > > However I want to use PHP on Windows but do not want to use IIS. > > > Currently on my test system I run IIS + WinXP + PHP, and I am running > > > PHP as a CGI executable. If I use Apache as the Web server software, > > > will I be able to take full advantage of PHP? Currently I know the CGI > > > > > runs slower then "navtive"? (is that correct?) If I install Apache on > > > a Win2k machine, will my PHP performance be equivalent to a Linux > > > machine? > > > > > > Thank for your response! > > > > > > Matt Babineau > > > Freelance Internet Developer > > > ----------------------------------------- > > > e: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > p: 603.943.4237 > > > w: <http://www.criticalcode.com/> http://www.criticalcode.com PO BOX > > > 601 Manchester, NH 03105 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > PHP Windows Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) > > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php > > > > > > -- > PHP Windows Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php > -- PHP Windows Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
