Apache Vs Abysess? -->Pros & Cons?

[videobubba]

Hi, I am wondering if someone can point out the Pros + Cons to me between Apache, and Abysess, and which one would be better.. I've been thinking about Apache for some time because everyone says it is more secure and much better.. Well the Topic Title says it all.


Thanks,
Matt

[TRUSTAbyss]

Ok , just because someone says Apache is more
secure and more better doesn't mean it is , Abyss
is much more secure than Apache Web Server.

Note: What do you mean by Pros & Cons ?

Apache Vulnerbilities:
http://www.saintcorporation.com/cgi-bin/demo_full_tut.pl?tutorial_name=Apache_vulnerabilities.html&fact_color=doc&tag=

[videobubba]

Pros+cons, Up's Down's...

Well this leads me to this question. How come all the people that offer "paid" hosting use Apache?

[TRUSTAbyss]

Because Apache has Virtual Hosting support
that can host an unlimited number of websites.

Also Apache is the most used Web
Server for commercial websites.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Even if it is the most used , Abyss will have a bunch
of features in the professional version and in free ver.

To Aprelium: I already have my money for the
Pro version just release it soon and its yours !

[Anonymoose]

You don't like talking about it because you don't understand it. You can't simply make a blanket statement of Abyss is more secure than Apache. Justify it. Linking to a list of vulnerabilties means nothing - Apache provides more functionality, is a hell of a lot larger, and is developed by more people. It is open source, people can spend hours of their time pouring over the Apache source looking for vulnerabilities. Of course more will be discovered. Abyss has had it's fair share too but I see you chose not to mention those...

By Pros and Cons he meant advantages and disadvantages. If you try I'm sure you could give a (biased) view of some of these...

There are also some very promising alternatives in the middle ground between Abyss and Apache. Out of courtesy for Aprelium I won't mention them here, but I have come across another open source cross platform webserver with full gui, no limitations on number of connections, PHP4 support built in (no need to install PHP, it's there!) running in *full* cgi mode rather than separately, runs as a system service, provides SSL, and virtual hosting all in under 2mb.

I've been evaluating it for over a month now, but I'm waiting to see what features end up where in the Pro vs Free versions of Abyss before I make a final decision.

[TRUSTAbyss]

Why should I put all the Vulerbilities of Abyss
this server hasn't been vulnerable in months !

[videobubba]

So Abysess would be best for personal use I am getting at?

[Anonymoose]

Yes, Abyss is ideal for hosting a personal website on your own PC. Apache is overkill. If you don't know that you need it, you don't need it ;)

TRUSTpunk, you should have listed them because it implies that you can give a balanced argument, not rant like a spoiled child "MY TOY IS BETTER!".

[TRUSTAbyss]

Fine if you want to see them look here

http://www.saintcorporation.com/cgi-bin/demo_full_tut.pl?tutorial_name=Abyss_web_server.html&fact_color=doc&tag=

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

THIS TOPIC IS CLOSED !

[Anonymoose]

Nice tantrum.

As you can see, both Abyss and Apache have had serious vulnerabilities in the past, but both sets of authors are hopefully learning from their mistakes. There's nothing wrong with presenting the view from both sides of the fence, regardless of which you prefer. Don't get me wrong, Abyss is still miles ahead of a lot of other free webservers, but it also has a lot catching up to do to stay in the game.

[aprelium]

Any software can have flaws. We're not hiding the fact that Abyss has in the past some vulnerabilities. But all most of these were not critical and were fixed quickly. As far as I know, the longest bug fixing took 1 hours and the patched release was available during the same day.

But since version 1.1.6 (during the last year), no vulnerability has been found. Version 1.2 has been available for more than 7 months and nothing wrong was found with it.
Some will say that this is because Abyss is not as deployed as Apache. This is true to some extent but Abyss download figures are increasing month after month and the number of users is growing at a sharp rate.


Anonymoose,

There are other alternatives to Abyss Web Server. But according to you, having more features means being better. We're not sure that this statement holds always. Adding more features to a piece of software is easy, but maintaining the quality and delivering a trouble-free product is the hard part of the task.

You seem also to think that open source alternatives are better simply because they are "open source". The open source development model is cool and can lead to gems like the Linux kernel.

But how many gems can you find out of the 70,000 open source projects hosted on sourceforge.net? The vast majority of open source projects are poorly written and maintained.

While developing Abyss Web Server, we forced ourselves to conform to higher coding standards. A lot of our time is spent on testing and improving its usability, and we can confess that we've reached our goals since most of the questions people send us (or post on this forum) are related to third party products and not to Abyss Web Server itself.

Aprelium is committed to improving Abyss Web Server. We believe that our software is technologically superior to many other alternatives although it is a "small piece of freeware". But we're going to make the technological gap bigger and bigger in the future because we're not code monkeys who get excited when they write 1000 lines of code per day, we are software developers who plan, think, and then write 100 lines to do things in a better way :-)
_________________
Support Team
Aprelium - http://www.aprelium.com

[cesaradf]

I am not sure, but I think apache was one of the firsts Web servers to exist! So, more time, more people using it, more people knows about it!

I've used both and:
- Abyss is more light, less memory, less cpu consumption
- Configuration - This is a major difference, you can configure abyss with one eye, sick, and no hands :). Apache is a black box with roles :). I am making a comparision considering you never configured a web server.
- Capabilities. Since apache is more time there, much more "wich lists" has been processed, but even this, is just a few details and particularities, some security things and the famous multi domain capability

[carl_mcdade]

Well I just installed Abyss and found it lacking the one thing I need a personal webserver for, Error checking and debugging. That stupid error 200 page is getting on my nerves and so I will be going back to Apache 2 if this is somethng that cannot be fixed.

[iNaNimAtE]

What scripting language are you using?
_________________
Bienvenidos!

[Anonymoose]