httpd-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>
Subject Re: [users@httpd] Apache 1.3 on Windows stats
Date Tue, 19 Dec 2006 05:08:41 GMT
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


Mime
View raw message