IIS Reviews

We have a GIS solution from ESRI, ArcGIS Web Adaptor, and it is installed on top of IIS. It's part of ArcGIS Enterprise solution.

The graphical user interface makes it easy for users to configure the sites. 

This solution needs to be easier for cases where you want to have an IIS cluster. If you have several IIS solutions running, it is not clear on how to make them communicate to each other. Normally, IIS Web Server run independently on each server. To have "IIS cluster", currently you need to have a network load balancer (NLB) appliance running in front of them. We use NLB to distribute the load and have high-availability of IIS Web Server.

This solution is stable. However, because of the way IIS interacts with the application pool, it is possible that another application running in different application pool, can have an impact to other application pool. Theoretically, each application pool will have independent process and should not conflicting between each other.

This is something that we are looking into because we want to have IIS Web Server that can communicate between each other. So far, we cannot find this options inside it, anywhere on the menu.

In our office, we only have few people who use this solution and we don't have a plans to increase its usage. It is for internal publishing only.

But for our client, we implement this solution in production environment and so far, no critical issue happened to run IIS Web Server on it.

We have not been in contact with technical support. So far, we have been able to handle all issues.

The initial setup of this solution is simple. Even if you aren't familiar with it, it is not complex. If you are installing it inside Windows Server, it will take less than half an hour to deploy. In most cases, it can be done in fifteen minutes.

This solution comes included with Windows Server.

My advice for anybody who is considering this solution is to go ahead with it. This is a mature product that is suitable for production environment. It competes with the Linux-based web server, which has more features. However, Microsoft is becoming more friendly with the open-source community, so hopefully they will implement more advanced features inside IIS.

It seems to me that Microsoft has been evolving the product with one of the main goals to be ease of use. However, I think that they need to focus on handling the biggest load. 

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

We are a system integrator and this is one of the solutions that we assist our customers with. Our customers are primarily government departments, agencies, and ministries. These organizations are not very comfortable with using the cloud, so the majority of deployments are on-premises.

This solution is used for the customer's website or internal applications.

The areas of this solution that need improvement are monitoring, debugging, and troubleshooting. Having the monitoring as standard on the user interface would be nice.

There needs to be an easy way to escalate technical support issues beyond level one, quickly.

This is definitely a stable solution.

Scalability is neither here nor there. You can say it's scalable, but it's an open-ended question because you have to consider whether you can host an application or product for country-wide use. I'd like to say no, but it can be used as part of a scalable infrastructure.

We have contacted technical support, albeit rarely. I would rate them a six out of ten. It is not that they are slow to reply, but rather they are slow when it comes to understanding the problem. They often repeat the diagnostic steps that we have already performed.

The first level of support is not very good because by the time we speak with them, we are already past that point. This is because we do have experience and we can often solve the problems that are easy, or of medium-level difficulty. Consequently, if we have to open a support request then the problem is already difficult or complicated. We need to be able to escalate quickly. This is true in most cases, and the delay comes about because of the entry-level support people.

In addition to this solution, we have worked with Apache Tomcat for Linux.

The choice of solution is dictated by the customer's requirements. If it is a Java application then we need to use Tomcat or Apache. If it's a .NET application in use then you need to use the IIS. It isn't a personal choice, or whether one is better than the other. Rather, it is about the application.

The initial setup of this solution is very easy. The deployment takes between thirty minutes and two hours, maximum.

Usually, it will take one or two people to maintain this solution, including the website, if the whole infrastructure is Microsoft.

We implement and deploy this solution for our customers. We have an internal technical team for this.

This is a solution that I can recommend.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

I use the solution to research and help our clients with dashboards and reports.

The most valuable feature of the solution is its capability to create different kinds of reports and charts. It has an intuitive user interface and provides a lot of options for building reports. The solution is also very user-friendly.

The initial setup could be made easier.

I have been using the solution for six months.

Our clients feel that other BI tools are more stable than IIS. I rate the stability an eight out of ten.

The solution is scalable. I rate the scalability a nine out of ten.

The initial setup is a bit complex. Our clients manage their own setups.

The deployment can be done in-house. A team of three or four people is required to deploy and maintain the solution.

We have seen a 50% return on investment on the product.

We have to pay a license fee to use the solution. The solution provides multiple licensing options.

I would recommend the solution to others. I rate the product an eight and a half or nine out of ten.

We primarily use the solution for a publishing website.

The solution is the easiest way to publish applications which have been designed by older development tools.

Different parameters in this product can be a bit difficult. As soon as you introduce something new, and especially in the Microsoft environment, you always need to do new training sessions to understand what are new functionalities are. Finding the correct options are not more intuitive, and it should be.

The solution is very stable.

The scalability depends on how you have set it up. If you're running IIS on a single server, it might not be as capable as if you are on many in a cluster or with load balancing and so on.

We don't a contact for technical support, so I mostly have to cross my fingers and hope that nothing goes wrong.

I wasn't around for the initial setup, but I can say that we started fairly simple, and it's grown more and more complex as time has gone on.

We use the on-premises deployment model.

The solution is stable, it is working, and you can do a lot with this, but it is not my favorite product. I would prefer to use something that was open-source instead. I would rate it seven out of ten.

We primarily use the solution for the database and application system. We provide information systems for public and private companies.

The solution is easy to use, easy to maintain and isn't too technical. 

The solution's security needs improvement.

The solution should improve the cluster environment and load balancing.

Occasionally we have a problem with stability.

The scalability isn't so good. We have about 2,000 internal users, but externally we may have as many as one million users. Our service is public service. We do plan to increase usage.

We have a contract with technical support and they have helped us with issues in the past. We've been satisfied so far.

The solution is easy to set up. It took maybe an hour or two to deploy.

We use the private cloud deployment model.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten. I'd recommend the solution.

We use this program as application server.

What I like most about this program, is the fact that it's built into Windows, and then I also like the interface and the support.

I haven't yet come across anything that needs to improve. Perhaps the installation process can be simplified.

I have been using IIS for ten, twelve years now.

The stability is okay. It's fairly enterprise-grade and robust for enterprise use. 

The program is scalable. We have between 50 and 100 users.

Microsoft's technical support has always been very good, so I am satisfied with it.

We've used this platform from the beginning.

The initial setup was somewhere in the middle. It wasn't complicated but it wasn't easy either. The documentation isn't very good and the options are very complex.

I will definitely recommend this solution to others. On a scale from 1 to 10, I will give it an eight rating. 

We primarily use the solution for our IT help desk interface.

All the features of Microsoft IIS are valuable.

The graphical user interface has room for improvement and can be more user-friendly.

The price of the solution has room for improvement.

I have been using the solution for over ten years.

The solution is very stable.

I give the scalability an eight out of ten.

We have around 150 end users.

The initial setup is complex because we are not familiar with the steps required to deploy. Over time, once we become familiar with the process the setup becomes easier.

I give the price of the solution a five out of ten.

I give the solution an eight out of ten.

I recommend Microsoft IIS to others.

We are basically using IIS like people use SharePoint. Technically IIS is a configurable web server. SharePoint is meant to be a collaborative tool. We configured IIS to be a collaborative tool of our own design.  

The most valuable parts of IIS are the interface, simplicity, and ease of management.  

There are a lot of security issues with IIS, and this has become more of a concern, especially recently. That security problem is the biggest disadvantage.  

Scalability is also a problem. Microsoft needs to improve on that aspect of the product. There are many limitations on IIS that seem like they should not be hard to remedy.  

On the other hand, Microsoft is doing more to concentrate on Azure for the cloud solution, so it may be their intent that Azure is ultimately the better solution.  

Overall, I have been working with IIS solutions on the cloud and on-premises for eight to ten years.  

Recently IIS has been more stable than in earlier releases and it has gotten better as it matured.  

I do not think that much of IIS as a very scalable solution. It is used by our entire organization, which is about 1,000-plus end-users. But the product itself has limitations built into it.  

We have a maximum of two people who manage the product. We work with it somewhat less now because of the scalability limitations and security issues, so we also dedicate less staff to projects with the product.  

The technical support is neutral: not good and not bad. It has become less satisfying because they changed how support is handled and we have to depend on forums. We do not have direct access to Microsoft support, in other words. It is not at all optimal.  

Microsoft tries to divert from this lack of interest in supporting the product, I think, by providing documentation. We also use the community and go into the forums — the Microsoft TechNet forums — and then use Google as a last resort. For technical support on IIS, it turns out that Google is our best friend.  

From the beginning, we have been using Microsoft products as our base solution. We have Unix and Apache and those things in addition in the places where we need them, but we are mainly running on IIS and Windows.  

The initial setup was straightforward. That is one of the biggest advantages for IIS. It takes just three or four clicks and the installation is done. The whole process takes just a few minutes.  

Recent versions, especially IIS 10, are very stable. For the stability I highly recommend IIS.  

On a scale from one to ten where one is the worst and ten is the best, I would rate IIS as an eight-out-of-ten.