For a number of reasons, most of our web servers are *nix, so for the
one box that had to be Windows (no way to talk to RDB7 on a Vax from
*nix at the time), I kept to the same server. We do have a few boxes
running IIS, but to me that feels like wearing a skirt - it's something
someone else does. Nothing wrong with it, I just don't do it.
I've never done a head-to-head, and I'm sure microsoft.com runs on IIS,
but there's another aphorism - if it's not broke, don't fix it.
On 8/19/2011 5:31 AM, Justin Dearing wrote:
On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 10:08 PM, Rukbat <ruk...@webdingers.com
<mailto:ruk...@webdingers.com>> wrote:
I've been running PHP on an Apache server on a Win2k box for years.
Out of curiosity why not IIS? Does apache perform better? Also, if you
actually benchmarked it, have to tried again recently on a modern
version of Windows and PHP? Microsoft has put a lot of time into
making PHP suck less on Windows. If you use FastCGI as opposed to
ISAPI and an un-threaded 32-bit build of PHP, IIS performance is
really good.
I never put PHP on Apache for windows and IIS in a head to head
comparison though. I always did PHP on IIS because when in Rome ....
_______________________________________________
New York PHP Users Group Community Talk Mailing List
http://lists.nyphp.org/mailman/listinfo/talk
http://www.nyphp.org/Show-Participation
