IIS vs Apache

[yankytrash]

I host a small number of websites with a combination of Win2000 Server, Apache Webserver for Windows, and Serv-U FTP Server.

I'm trying to implement IIS that came with Win2000 Server and Front Page 2000 (Is that 5.0?). I'm finding it terribly complicated and very disorganized. Default folders are placed in my new web sites that I didn't ask for, and setting up multiple-user and/or anonymous permissions is a nightmare.

My question is this: Are there any REAL advantages implementing IIS vs a combination of Serv-U and Apache for a small company that's comfortable with the latter?

Our requirements to note are:

Large Web Storage for multiple users.
Users may create/delete FTP users of their web sites through FTP.
Personal CGI-Bins for individual users.
Basically, we have it set up so the administrators don't have to do anything after they set up the folder in Apache and give the user FTP access.

I thank you for your input on this matter.

 

[axslinger]

If you are comfortable with Apache and know how to install Front Page extensions, it is my opinion that a Linux box running Apache will be more stable. The beauty of Linux is that some distros have the web server up and running out of the box, with the default installation. Just hit the box from a workstation and viola! the default page comes up. And because it's much cheaper you can run it on a box of its own, leave all of the unnecessary crap off it such as any window managers etc and manage it using Webmin. Youll have a nice, streamline system that never needs to be rebooted.
Brian