IIS Reviews

My main use cases for IIS are mainly for the various local websites that we launched for internal use in the company, as well as for a VA project that they used to log in to, which is a contractor's site project for the Department of VA. We developed some portal that had veterans' personal information that used to be on the cloud before going to the GovCloud, as we were only testing for them. We gave them access to the website, which was a dashboard type of website.

The best features of IIS are that you can design your own website and manage it yourself, creating as many websites as you want.

The benefits I see from using IIS are limited to say because we were using only Microsoft products at that time, so we didn't have any other need. I wouldn't say that we were stuck with Microsoft, but that is the product that has been used for a long time, so we didn't have any problem with IIS. It definitely did benefit us.

What I saw for improvement is the configuration and designing of HTTPS sites. While it was easy, if there are any user-friendly improvements that can be made, that would definitely improve the product. It should be more user-friendly because unless you know how IIS works as a Microsoft product, a system admin cannot just manage it. If creating a website, adding a database, and hosting the website were more user-friendly, that would be very beneficial.

I have been dealing with IIS for at least three years in system admin and network admin capacity.

The initial setup of IIS was not complex. There is documentation available for anyone to get started with, and I went through all the documentation. I had to learn how the product works, and I had enough time to do that because it was not a production environment. It was just development and staging, so I followed the process and the documentation. It really helped, and I needed some help, but not with IIS, just with other failover requirements, and they helped me with all of their features of the Microsoft product.

I would say the stability of IIS is good. Unless I know the security part, I won't be able to comment on that, but it was secured for us, as we launched the product, and people were accessing it from India and Virginia, and we had no problem.

Regarding IIS's scalability, because we were very small, I wouldn't say anything about scalability as it was not a big configuration.

I would rate the support from Microsoft very high because I definitely got all the help during the testing time of the development kit while we were configuring features on our on-premises server. They gave me very good support, and there is no question about it. I was very happy about that.

Positive

I don't have any experience with other products such as Red Hat solutions or more recent AWS options, nor is there anything else that I could provide a review for.

The initial setup of IIS was not complex. There is documentation available for anyone to get started with, and I went through all the documentation. I had to learn how the product works, and I had enough time to do that because it was not a production environment. It was just development and staging, so I followed the process and the documentation. It really helped, and I needed some help, but not with IIS, just with other failover requirements.

In my company, we were just customers with Microsoft. We weren't partners or resellers of the products, as I worked a long time ago, and that company had a test lab for different products in Europe, such as Microsoft and Cisco, among others. I have no idea if they're still doing anything with those products.

The configuration process, specifically designing and opening an HTTPS site, was straightforward. While it's not difficult, user-friendly improvements would definitely enhance the product. It should be more user-friendly overall, because unless you know how IIS works as a Microsoft product, a system admin cannot just manage it. Making tasks such as creating a website, adding a database, and hosting the website more user-friendly would be beneficial.

For the pricing, setup cost, and licensing for IIS, as a Microsoft product, I didn't think much about separately purchasing an IIS product as it is part of Microsoft Windows. We bought a development kit when we were developing the portal, and afterward, we purchased a license. We never had any pricing issue, but I don't know if it is competitive or not.

We didn't evaluate other options before choosing IIS because we have been using Microsoft products for a very long time. When AWS came, we didn't look into other database hosting websites on AWS. We never thought about it because though we used AWS for cloud services, we didn't change our product line.

I have experience with AWS, and I am most familiar with the server environment, as we just use the server environment and then use Microsoft products on an AWS environment.

I have experience with Windows Server IIS, which I ran on my own on-premise data center. The website was developed and then hosted, and through IIS, we managed the servers.

The manageability within the IIS environment is not very difficult. For server management, you need to ensure data backup, data restore, and you have a DR configured to keep the database intact. It was done on-premises, so I had no problem doing that. If you have to go to the cloud, then you should have the storage connected to the IIS server and also have a DR set up for that.

I didn't use Microsoft Azure tools, but since it is a Microsoft product, Azure has all the portability, so you don't have to worry about compatibility on the cloud.

On a scale of 1-10, I would rate this solution a 10.

I use IIS to expose web services and websites.

IIS integration with Windows is very helpful for my web applications in general.

From a security standpoint, I see no problems. Basically, IIS is very secure, but security is something you have to pay attention to on a day-to-day basis. It is changing so fast, so you cannot really say a product is secure if you are not keeping up with the trends.

IIS fits properly for my business needs. There are a lot of possibilities to upgrade the out-of-the-box functionalities, so it is really great.

Most of the time, stability issues are related to what you are pushing and what you are publishing on the server. It is not the product itself that is the issue, but you can follow up what is going on. You can check the memory consumption and the number of crashes. It is very useful.

The biggest benefit of IIS is that it is built into Windows Server, and you can rely on Microsoft when you have issues.

In terms of IIS performance, you can use features like compression and caching.

IIS is free.

The installation of IIS is very straightforward.

IIS is built into every Windows Server, so you just have to tick a box and you can use it.

To be honest, I do not see any major areas for improvement. Perhaps something simple and minor. It should not go more complex than it is at the moment. The only disadvantage I see is that the documentation is a bit difficult to find. There is a lot of configuration that is very hard to get information about.

I have been using IIS for twenty years.

Most of the time, stability issues are related to what you are pushing and what you are publishing on the server. It is not the product itself that is the issue, but you can follow up what is going on. You can check the memory consumption and the number of crashes. It is very useful.

IIS is scalable.

The technical support from Microsoft is good.

Positive

I have worked with Nginx and Apache in the past.

Nginx is nice because it is free and very light, but I do not think it can handle a lot of requests. For Apache, I do not prefer it because it is more complex and it is built on top of Java, and sometimes the errors are very difficult to handle.

The installation of IIS is very straightforward.

IIS is built into every Windows Server, so you just have to tick a box and you can use it.

I have worked with Nginx and Apache in the past.

Nginx is nice because it is free and very light, but I do not think it can handle a lot of requests. For Apache, I do not prefer it because it is more complex and it is built on top of Java, and sometimes the errors are very difficult to handle.

My advice to people who look into using IIS is to keep it simple. I have rated this product a nine out of ten.

I use the entire Azure portfolio, including Power Platforms, Power BI, Windows, and Windows Server. I also use various Azure services for application management, domain management through Entra ID or Active Directory, virtual machines, and SQL databases or SQL Server.

Regarding IIS, it is a web server that I have primarily used for internal applications. I implemented a shareholder's portal as one example, where shareholders can view documentation, fill out forms, and review or follow up on processes. That was a web application I implemented in IIS. After that implementation, I designed architectures depending on that kind of component or services. Since it is a web server, I have mainly used it for web applications. I have not used it for public applications, but primarily for internal applications.

IIS comes as a functionality in Windows Server and Windows desktop. It is basically an add-on in the system already, so you do not pay extra for it, based on my current knowledge.

Entra ID is the Active Directory application. Microsoft changed the name to Entra ID. Entra ID functions as the security front-end for all user management and identity management with Azure.

I see that IIS has maintained the same interface for a long time, so they could potentially use more automation or integrate Copilot into it to make it easier to use. I have not accessed or checked on IIS recently, but integrating Copilot could help automate processes or assist in identifying where to make actions or take actions on the server.

I have just started the implementation of virtual desktops and virtual services with virtual machines. I have been evaluating those services over the last few weeks.

I have not interacted with Microsoft support for that particular need. However, in general, Microsoft support is good. At this point, I understand the experience should be the same with IIS or Windows Server.

I have primarily used IIS for internal applications, so I have not used it in a production, high-demand environment. Currently, with SaaS services, large applications with high-volume and high-consumption are typically implemented in a cloud service, which provides more scalability functionalities. I assume that IIS should have options for scalability, but since most large projects use cloud services, cloud solutions may have better scalability options compared to IIS.

I have not interacted with Microsoft support for that particular need. However, in general, the support from Microsoft is good.

Positive

I was previously part of an evaluation of Oracle Finance Services, but that was a long time ago and I did not complete the project. My main focus has always been on Microsoft.

I have used products from Amazon, but I am not quite knowledgeable about those.

I have similar experience with Google. Outside of those three, I have not worked with any other platform.

AWS is Amazon, and we do not use Amazon. We work 100 percent with Azure, and all the products from Azure are what we are using now.

The last products I used, I purchased them through a client. Before that, my head office company was the one that purchased the products.

I purchased products directly from Microsoft. We had an agreement with Microsoft at my previous company, and we have an agreement directly with Microsoft now. The last purchase I made was also directly through the Azure portal.

I have tested some products, but I have not implemented anything with them as of yet. I have also been working with Azure Automation and a similar low-code app creation service whose name I cannot recall at the moment.

I have used Windows Server IIS. I am not a full expert, but I understand the functionality and how to use it.

IIS is Internet Information Services, which is application infrastructure. The main benefits include security control where you can control different access levels and integrate with other services to manage application security. You can control the web server and define rules to manage application behavior depending on certain conditions. With one instance, you can create or manage different web applications and group them in different application pools. You can define resources specifically for each application pool and reduce the impact across the whole server.

For example, regarding the security aspect, integrating IIS allows you to use a single authentication method. You can authenticate the whole application through IIS and, for example, authenticate in the database. You can manage part of the single sign-on using IIS. I have not seen load balancing implementation, but I assume there could be some kind of integration for handling load balancing or redirection of web applications. I have not managed that part, but I know there are capabilities. IIS has the capabilities to include logs to review what is happening with the server and integrate a live monitoring process or an audit process to follow up on server performance.

I am still working with Microsoft products. I mostly work with the classic Microsoft products such as the operating system, Windows Server, Windows 11.

I used to work with Windows Server IIS. I am going to stay with Microsoft and with the Windows products.

The App-V infrastructure I deal with was also including IIS, but the server infrastructure will be decommissioned at the beginning of next year, so I am not working with that anymore.

I cannot recall which features I found most valuable.

They need to improve their response time and first level support quality because the escalation process takes too long.

I stay in level one support too much and escalate very slowly to the real technical support.

I have been dealing with IIS for, let's say, 10 years.

I did not have any problems with Windows Server IIS.

I did not have any problems with Windows Server IIS.

My experience with the technical support by Microsoft at large is satisfactory.

Positive

I did not deal with anything similar before IIS.

This IIS change is not relevant as I am not going to switch to some other tools in the future.

My experience was great. I am not sure if I purchased it on the AWS marketplace or somewhere else. I am on the technical side, and I am not involved in financial or contractual aspects, so I cannot tell if the pricing of Windows products or IIS is reasonable or competitive.

On a scale of 1-10, I rate this solution a 7.

Neutral

I use IIS for publishing websites, particularly with SSL certificates, and it serves our ERP system. We also connect it with our tax government portal for online payments.

IIS works natively with Windows Server without any issues in publishing certificates. It is easy to publish websites with SSL, and it integrates well within the local environment and cloud. Moreover, it offers a user-friendly interface for IT administrators.

The only issue I've encountered is with certificates not working fine sometimes. It's influenced by the server's service performance.

I have been using IIS for years.

I would rate IIS's stability as an eight out of ten.

I would rate scalability as seven or eight out of ten. It depends on the server environment and the presence of a UPS for power backup.

We do not use technical support from Microsoft. It is manageable without it. If there is a big issue, we open a ticket, however, there are typically no significant issues.

Positive

We previously used Apache publishing with exam yet faced issues with SSL publishing, which prompted us to switch to IIS.

It is easier to set up a website with SSL in IIS compared to Apache or other solutions.

The solution's ROI depends on the provider used. If hosting on your own server, it is necessary to invest in its security along with server maintenance.

If you have a Windows license, there is no additional cost for IIS. However, you may need to pay for SSL publishing at times.

We evaluated exams with Apache for publishing websites.

I recommend IIS for medium to small businesses. For large business environments, it may be suitable for specific published applications. 

I rate IIS overall at eight out of ten due to its need for secure environments and licensing considerations.

My company uses the servers under IIS for some of the applications. It is a web application, so my company runs it on IIS.

My company develops some applications in-house, and once the development and deployment phases of such applications are finalized, it is expected to be deployed on IIS so that they can be accessed from outside of our office premises, specifically in some branch office or a real project where the applications can be accessed through IIS.

My company has been using the services from IIS for a long time, and one of the things that we have noticed is that it is a good system that offers good service. Every time a new version of the product was introduced, there were improvements in it from Microsoft's side, and we haven't found any challenges or problems with this service so far. For our company, it is not possible to comment on what requires improvement in the product.

With every new version and new OS, the security aspects of the product were improved.

The visibility feature of the product is an area with certain shortcomings where improvements are required. If some AI features can be added to the product, then it would be good.

If Microsoft could come up with some AI features for the product, then it would be advantageous for our company.

I have experience with IIS.

Due to the visibility added to figuring out the services offered by IIS in different regions, our company can see if the product is functional or not. If the visibility option is added at the top, my company would have the advantage of being able to monitor the highest levels of service we receive overall in the organization.

The number of product users in our company depends on the applications we develop in our organization. The number of users varies depending on the requirement.

My company does not receive any technical support from the vendor or partner of the product because we already have the capacity to do everything by ourselves.

The product's initial setup phase is straightforward.

My company's internal staff deployed the product, so there is no need for expertise to deal with it. What we need to do during the deployment is change the management or order based on the process. The software development team issues the system team required to deploy the developed application. The application needs to be deployed on IIS, and then the software team should be notified about it so that they can test whether the application has been deployed and whether it is active or not. The deployment process doesn't take a long time or doesn't need much expertise, and it takes around 15 minutes to be completed, making it an easy process.

The solution can be deployed in 15 minutes.

My company's internal staff members deployed the product.

The tool's ROI is good. The product has an impact on the operational costs, and I can say that it is a very cheap solution because we have the capacity to buy it, making it not so expensive.

IIS comes along with an OS license from Microsoft. Others can opt for a perpetual-based licensing model to be able to use the system. Based on the OS licenses we have, we get IIS as a part of the stack of Microsoft products. The product has been cost-effective for my company, and it is not very expensive.

My company does not use any AI features in the product.

I would recommend the product to others based on their requirements. If someone has requirements associated with Microsoft solutions or products, like IIS, then it is advisable to have IIS as an in-built feature a part of the servers from Microsoft. Sometimes, if you use different web services instead of what Microsoft offers, then it might become very challenging for you to troubleshoot or identify problems. It is always recommended to use the products that are glued to Microsoft's other solutions. If somebody has requirements that are different from what Microsoft offers, then it would be good if that person goes ahead with the appropriate web service solution.

I rate the tool a nine out of ten.

We use Windows Server only for Eggplant Manager. Otherwise, I'm not using it.

At the moment, we have big problems with stability, and I'm not very happy at the moment. So, the stability could be improved.

I have been using it for a few years. 

The initial setup is complex. 

We have an in-house consultant. 

We have a license.

I cannot say it's not good. It is good, but not for me at the moment due to some operational problems I have.

Overall, I would rate the solution a five out of ten.

We commonly use IIS to deploy most of the applications or network services internally or externally. We have to deploy different kinds of applications on IIS to access them externally. IIS makes these applications available to the internal or external end users.

The solution is very simple to use and easy to deploy. Once you deploy your application, it can reach the desired users. Since the solution already came together with the Windows servers, the deployment of our applications is clear and straightforward.

Most of the time, we procure perpetual licenses, and getting support is not easy for us. We didn't face many issues with IIS because of our expertise and the extensive experience we have using the Microsoft Windows service. In most cases, we figured out solutions by ourselves. Sometimes, we encounter difficult issues, and getting support from Microsoft to resolve those issues is not easy.

It would be good if IIS could add monitoring features.

I have been using IIS for a long time.

Once it's up and running, IIS is a stable solution.

I rate the solution a nine out of ten for stability.

IIS is a scalable solution. You can add different kinds of services or applications within IIS by separating or using different kinds of ports. More than 2,050 users might be using the solution in our organization.

I rate the solution a nine out of ten for scalability.

The solution’s initial setup is straightforward.

We implemented the solution through an in-house team. It takes around 15 minutes to deploy the solution.

Users can get a subscription-based license or a perpetual license for IIS.

We are hosting web-based applications using IIS. I would recommend IIS to people planning to deploy any kind of application. The solution requires additional protection or security because IIS can't be protected by itself. In terms of performance, the solution stands up perfectly to traffic spikes if your network backbone is good.

It's an operating system. If you have a machine to be used as a Microsoft Windows server, you have to deploy it directly. From the security aspect, Microsoft provides patches every three years. Then, you have to patch on the Windows server machine you have. The side effect of Microsoft is that it can be easily penetrated by any kind of cyber attack. So, it easily breaks down compared to other products.

Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

We use the platform for hosting Dynamics from our Microsoft Server.

The product is essential for hosting our ERP and managing our database, making it very important for the company.

The product's most valuable features are performance and security. 

The solution's pricing and stability need improvement. 

I have been using IIS for seven months. 

We have 57 IIS users in our organization. We use it regularly. I rate the platform's scalability a nine. 

Microsoft's support is responsive enough to our requirements.

The initial setup process is straightforward. The deployment of the Microsoft server was precise. We were able to install Windows efficiently.

We take help from a third-party vendor for product implementation. 

They offer a one-time payment model for the product license, and we pay annually for support.

I rate the pricing an eight out of ten. 

I would recommend the platform to others because of the integrated security features and the reliability of the server OS. 

Overall, I rate IIS a nine out of ten.