Shifting Percentages: Apache Loses Parked Domains

Netcraft's March Web Server Survey shows the rope being tugged in the other direction.

Usually the news from the Netcraft Web Server Survey is upbeat for Linux folks, but the March 2002 report isn't. Look at the main graphs, and you'll see a tug of war between Apache and Microsoft IIS web servers that's been going on since 1998. In 2001 IIS made some significant gains on Apache, which held shares upwards of 60%, but those finally seemed to reverse in February 2002. But in March, IIS gained 4.89%, while Apache dropped 4.67%, to percentages among Top Developers of 57.36% for Apache and 34.02% for IIS.

Netcraft says this represents a shift of about two million sites, "primarily as a result of and Network Solutions migrating their domain parking facilities to a Windows front end. had been serving from Apache on Linux and is in the midst of migrating to Windows", Netcraft reports.

Of course, parked domains are a lot less functional than active ones, so this probably doesn't say much about the real and practical uses of the Web from the server side. But it's still annoying to lose even a few bragging rights share points.

Perhaps when these big registrars finish migrating to the Dark Side, the Apache share erosion will cease, or even turn around.

Doc Searls is senior editor of Linux Journal.



Doc Searls is the Editor in Chief of Linux Journal


Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Re: Shifting Percentages: Apache Loses Parked Domains

Anonymous's picture

They moved to Windows/IIS, and were hacked shortly thereafter. Sigh.

Re: Shifting Percentages: Apache Loses Parked Domains

brianlane's picture

I'd be interested to know why these companies are moving to windows. With all of the recent IIS problems why would they be asking for more trouble? An Apache system is far more secure in general, and for something as brain-dead as domain parking its about as secure as you can get without unplugging the NIC. IIS is going to make all those sites vulnerable to defacement (not that anyone would notice), and the hardware will be more vulnerable to being zombified (if there is such a word).

And what about the costs involved? IIS costs money to install, it costs money to move all those domains over to the new systems, and it costs more to maintain in the long run. Apache only costs money to maintain their current setup.

Something seems fishy to me, like maybe they got a really nice deal from someone to move all those dormant domains? I'd sure like to see a statement from the companies that are switching.