You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@httpd.apache.org by Christian Toledo <ch...@webcollage.com> on 2006/12/18 23:29:18 UTC
[users@httpd] Apache 1.3 on Windows stats
Would anyone know where I can get some numbers on market coverage for
Apache? We run an Apache 1.3 on Win32 environment (a nightmare to
support) and would like to know how popular is the Apache 2.x on Win32
platform. Besides the warm & fuzzy feeling of recommending the superior
Apache version, I would be curious to know if the numbers indicate
Apache2.x/Win32 to be a more popular and perhaps better supported
environment. Thanx.
Christian Toledo
Web Administrator
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The official User-To-User support forum of the Apache HTTP Server Project.
See <URL:http://httpd.apache.org/userslist.html> for more info.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
" from the digest: users-digest-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@httpd.apache.org
Re: [users@httpd] Apache 1.3 on Windows stats
Posted by "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> Christian Toledo wrote:
>> Would anyone know where I can get some numbers on market coverage for
>> Apache?
>
> You can buy this specific level of detail from either securityspace or from
> netcraft, but the general adoption rate of 2.0/2.2 v.s. 1.3 should be enough
> to convince you. In the securityspace report, pay specific attention to what
> they call market theft/upgrades. The sub report (scroll to the bottom) lets
> you zoom in on very specific release versions.
>
> In apache 1.3, nobody turned off the version - in 2.0 and 2.2 it's very very
> commonplace to see "Apache" with no version. I consider the -vast- majority
> of 'unversioned' Apache servers are now 2.x, and the 1.3.37 numbers should
> support my contention.
To give you an illustration, look at 1.3.33 and 1.3.37...
http://www.securityspace.com/s_survey/data/man.200610/srvch.html?server=Apache&revision=Apache%2F1.3.33
http://www.securityspace.com/s_survey/data/man.200610/srvch.html?server=Apache&revision=Apache%2F1.3.37
You see primarilly ping-ponging between apache subversions of 1.3, some of this
is load balancing, some of it are hot spares, some of it is a bug or quirk or
simply grabbing an older tarball when rebuilding a box for a legit purpose.
In other words - it's mostly stasis. Compare to 2.2.2/2.2.3
http://www.securityspace.com/s_survey/data/man.200610/srvch.html?server=Apache&revision=Apache%2F2.2.2
http://www.securityspace.com/s_survey/data/man.200610/srvch.html?server=Apache&revision=Apache%2F2.2.3
Or even the legacy 2.0.54 and 2.0.59
http://www.securityspace.com/s_survey/data/man.200610/srvch.html?server=Apache&revision=Apache%2F2.0.54
http://www.securityspace.com/s_survey/data/man.200610/srvch.html?server=Apache&revision=Apache%2F2.0.59
You can of course dig deeper into more versions.
But the net impact is the same, there is stasis in the 1.3 area, folks who just
'aren't moving' because it just works, while 2.x continues to pick up steam.
http://www.securityspace.com/s_survey/data/200610/index.html
FYI I don't trust their december data - something looks hokey. Not the numbers,
but the lack of them (lots of zeros).
I base my second assertion on this data...
http://www.securityspace.com/s_survey/data/man.200610/srvch.html?server=Apache&revision=Apache
those most actively changing things like their ServerTokens are those who have
activity deploying servers; those leaving things 'as is' are most likely to be
using other software. But after reviewing the data, the split is likely more
than 50% apache 2.x and less than 50% apache 1.3 but i'm having issues now
resolving this data to any greater precision.
Keep in mind; majority of 1.3 deployments are out-of-the-can distributions that
ship with redhat, osx and their ilk. Only the more modern RHES and OSX 10.5 are
coming with 2.x installed out of the box.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The official User-To-User support forum of the Apache HTTP Server Project.
See <URL:http://httpd.apache.org/userslist.html> for more info.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
" from the digest: users-digest-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@httpd.apache.org
Re: [users@httpd] Apache 1.3 on Windows stats
Posted by "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
Christian Toledo wrote:
> Would anyone know where I can get some numbers on market coverage for
> Apache? We run an Apache 1.3 on Win32 environment (a nightmare to
> support) and would like to know how popular is the Apache 2.x on Win32
> platform. Besides the warm & fuzzy feeling of recommending the superior
> Apache version, I would be curious to know if the numbers indicate
> Apache2.x/Win32 to be a more popular and perhaps better supported
> environment. Thanx.
First, the ASF no longer acknowledges Apache 1.3 whatsoever on threaded
architectures.
The threading support was a useful academic exercise, it certainly showed
the possibility of a rational approach to MPM (multi-process module) design.
So we are grateful for the patches. Heck, I invested somewhere around 1,000
hours of my own time on that support.
However, it's entirely useless to continue to run Apache 1.3 on Windows or
the old Novell port - unless you have an application which -cannot- be moved
to Apache 2.0 or 2.2. Today, the odds of that are nill...
...perhaps you have a module that doesn't support 2.0/2.2. All odds say that
the authors are gone if it was never ported to 2.0, so your hope of resolving
a problem down the road are zilch.
You can buy this specific level of detail from either securityspace or from
netcraft, but the general adoption rate of 2.0/2.2 v.s. 1.3 should be enough
to convince you. In the securityspace report, pay specific attention to what
they call market theft/upgrades. The sub report (scroll to the bottom) lets
you zoom in on very specific release versions.
In apache 1.3, nobody turned off the version - in 2.0 and 2.2 it's very very
commonplace to see "Apache" with no version. I consider the -vast- majority
of 'unversioned' Apache servers are now 2.x, and the 1.3.37 numbers should
support my contention.
Good luck in whichever directions you move next.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The official User-To-User support forum of the Apache HTTP Server Project.
See <URL:http://httpd.apache.org/userslist.html> for more info.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
" from the digest: users-digest-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@httpd.apache.org