Alternatives to Pow logo

Alternatives to Pow

NGINX, Apache HTTP Server, Microsoft IIS, Apache Tomcat, and OpenResty are the most popular alternatives and competitors to Pow.
5
8
+ 1
0

What is Pow and what are its top alternatives?

Pow is a zero-configuration Rack server for Mac OS X. It makes developing Rails and Rack applications as frictionless as possible. You can install it in ten seconds and have your first app up and running in under a minute. No mucking around with /etc/hosts, no compiling Apache modules, no editing configuration files or installing preference panes. And running multiple apps with multiple versions of Ruby is trivial.
Pow is a tool in the Web Servers category of a tech stack.
Pow is an open source tool with 3.4K GitHub stars and 266 GitHub forks. Here’s a link to Pow's open source repository on GitHub

Top Alternatives to Pow

  • NGINX

    NGINX

    nginx [engine x] is an HTTP and reverse proxy server, as well as a mail proxy server, written by Igor Sysoev. According to Netcraft nginx served or proxied 30.46% of the top million busiest sites in Jan 2018. ...

  • Apache HTTP Server

    Apache HTTP Server

    The Apache HTTP Server is a powerful and flexible HTTP/1.1 compliant web server. Originally designed as a replacement for the NCSA HTTP Server, it has grown to be the most popular web server on the Internet. ...

  • Microsoft IIS

    Microsoft IIS

    Internet Information Services (IIS) for Windows Server is a flexible, secure and manageable Web server for hosting anything on the Web. From media streaming to web applications, IIS's scalable and open architecture is ready to handle the most demanding tasks. ...

  • Apache Tomcat

    Apache Tomcat

    Apache Tomcat powers numerous large-scale, mission-critical web applications across a diverse range of industries and organizations. ...

  • OpenResty

    OpenResty

    OpenResty (aka. ngx_openresty) is a full-fledged web application server by bundling the standard Nginx core, lots of 3rd-party Nginx modules, as well as most of their external dependencies. ...

  • LiteSpeed

    LiteSpeed

    It is a drop-in Apache replacement and the leading high-performance, high-scalability server. You can replace your existing Apache server with it without changing your configuration or operating system details. As a drop-in replacement, it allows you to quickly eliminate Apache bottlenecks in 15 minutes with zero downtime. ...

  • Passenger

    Passenger

    Phusion Passenger is a web server and application server, designed to be fast, robust and lightweight. It takes a lot of complexity out of deploying web apps, adds powerful enterprise-grade features that are useful in production, and makes administration much easier and less complex. ...

  • Gunicorn

    Gunicorn

    Gunicorn is a pre-fork worker model ported from Ruby's Unicorn project. The Gunicorn server is broadly compatible with various web frameworks, simply implemented, light on server resources, and fairly speedy. ...

Pow alternatives & related posts

NGINX logo

NGINX

93.9K
44.2K
5.5K
A high performance free open source web server powering busiest sites on the Internet.
93.9K
44.2K
+ 1
5.5K
PROS OF NGINX
  • 1.4K
    High-performance http server
  • 896
    Performance
  • 728
    Easy to configure
  • 606
    Open source
  • 529
    Load balancer
  • 286
    Scalability
  • 285
    Free
  • 222
    Web server
  • 173
    Simplicity
  • 134
    Easy setup
  • 29
    Content caching
  • 19
    Web Accelerator
  • 14
    Capability
  • 13
    Fast
  • 11
    Predictability
  • 10
    High-latency
  • 7
    Reverse Proxy
  • 6
    Supports http/2
  • 4
    The best of them
  • 4
    Lots of Modules
  • 4
    Enterprise version
  • 4
    Great Community
  • 3
    High perfomance proxy server
  • 3
    Streaming media
  • 3
    Embedded Lua scripting
  • 3
    Reversy Proxy
  • 3
    Streaming media delivery
  • 2
    Fast and easy to set up
  • 2
    Lightweight
  • 2
    Slim
  • 2
    saltstack
  • 1
    Virtual hosting
  • 1
    Blash
  • 1
    GRPC-Web
  • 1
    Ingress controller
  • 1
    Narrow focus. Easy to configure. Fast
  • 1
    Along with Redis Cache its the Most superior
  • 0
    A
CONS OF NGINX
  • 8
    Advanced features require subscription

related NGINX posts

Recently I have been working on an open source stack to help people consolidate their personal health data in a single database so that AI and analytics apps can be run against it to find personalized treatments. We chose to go with a #containerized approach leveraging Docker #containers with a local development environment setup with Docker Compose and nginx for container routing. For the production environment we chose to pull code from GitHub and build/push images using Jenkins and using Kubernetes to deploy to Amazon EC2.

We also implemented a dashboard app to handle user authentication/authorization, as well as a custom SSO server that runs on Heroku which allows experts to easily visit more than one instance without having to login repeatedly. The #Backend was implemented using my favorite #Stack which consists of FeathersJS on top of Node.js and ExpressJS with PostgreSQL as the main database. The #Frontend was implemented using React, Redux.js, Semantic UI React and the FeathersJS client. Though testing was light on this project, we chose to use AVA as well as ESLint to keep the codebase clean and consistent.

See more
Gabriel Pa
Shared insights
on
TraefikTraefikNGINXNGINX
at

We switched to Traefik so we can use the REST API to dynamically configure subdomains and have the ability to redirect between multiple servers.

We still use nginx with a docker-compose to expose the traffic from our APIs and TCP microservices, but for managing routing to the internet Traefik does a much better job

The biggest win for naologic was the ability to set dynamic configurations without having to restart the server

See more
Apache HTTP Server logo

Apache HTTP Server

59.1K
17.9K
1.4K
The most popular web server on the Internet since April 1996
59.1K
17.9K
+ 1
1.4K
PROS OF APACHE HTTP SERVER
  • 477
    Web server
  • 305
    Most widely-used web server
  • 218
    Virtual hosting
  • 148
    Fast
  • 138
    Ssl support
  • 45
    Since 1996
  • 28
    Asynchronous
  • 5
    Robust
  • 4
    Proven over many years
  • 1
    Mature
  • 1
    Perfect Support
  • 1
    Perfomance
  • 0
    Many available modules
  • 0
    Many available modules
CONS OF APACHE HTTP SERVER
  • 2
    Hard to set up

related Apache HTTP Server posts

Tim Abbott
Shared insights
on
NGINXNGINXApache HTTP ServerApache HTTP Server
at

We've been happy with nginx as part of our stack. As an open source web application that folks install on-premise, the configuration system for the webserver is pretty important to us. I have a few complaints (e.g. the configuration syntax for conditionals is a pain), but overall we've found it pretty easy to build a configurable set of options (see link) for how to run Zulip on nginx, both directly and with a remote reverse proxy in front of it, with a minimum of code duplication.

Certainly I've been a lot happier with it than I was working with Apache HTTP Server in past projects.

See more
Marcel Kornegoor
Shared insights
on
NGINXNGINXApache HTTP ServerApache HTTP Server

nginx or Apache HTTP Server that's the question. The best choice depends on what it needs to serve. In general, Nginx performs better with static content, where Apache and Nginx score roughly the same when it comes to dynamic content. Since most webpages and web-applications use both static and dynamic content, a combination of both platforms may be the best solution.

Since both webservers are easy to deploy and free to use, setting up a performance or feature comparison test is no big deal. This way you can see what solutions suits your application or content best. Don't forget to look at other aspects, like security, back-end compatibility (easy of integration) and manageability, as well.

A reasonably good comparison between the two can be found in the link below.

See more
Microsoft IIS logo

Microsoft IIS

12.7K
5.4K
232
A web server for Microsoft Windows
12.7K
5.4K
+ 1
232
PROS OF MICROSOFT IIS
  • 82
    Great with .net
  • 53
    I'm forced to use iis
  • 25
    Use nginx
  • 18
    Azure integration
  • 14
    Best for ms technologyes ms bullshit
  • 10
    Fast
  • 6
    Performance
  • 6
    Reliable
  • 4
    Powerful
  • 3
    Webserver
  • 3
    Simple to configure
  • 2
    Easy setup
  • 1
    Охуенный
  • 1
    Shipped with Windows Server
  • 1
    Ssl integration
  • 1
    1
  • 1
    Security
  • 1
    I am not forced to use iis anymore :)
CONS OF MICROSOFT IIS
  • 1
    Had to stuck on MS stack

related Microsoft IIS posts

I am currently in school for computer science and am doing a class project about web servers. Our assignment is to research and select one of these web servers. Could you please let me know which one you would choose among NGINX, Microsoft IIS, and Apache HTTP Server and why?

See more
Apache Tomcat logo

Apache Tomcat

12.1K
8.5K
200
An open source software implementation of the Java Servlet and JavaServer Pages technologies
12.1K
8.5K
+ 1
200
PROS OF APACHE TOMCAT
  • 79
    Easy
  • 72
    Java
  • 48
    Popular
  • 1
    Spring web
CONS OF APACHE TOMCAT
    Be the first to leave a con

    related Apache Tomcat posts

    Остап Комплікевич

    I need some advice to choose an engine for generation web pages from the Spring Boot app. Which technology is the best solution today? 1) JSP + JSTL 2) Apache FreeMarker 3) Thymeleaf Or you can suggest even other perspective tools. I am using Spring Boot, Spring Web, Spring Data, Spring Security, PostgreSQL, Apache Tomcat in my project. I have already tried to generate pages using jsp, jstl, and it went well. However, I had huge problems via carrying already created static pages, to jsp format, because of syntax. Thanks.

    See more

    Java Spring JUnit

    Apache HTTP Server Apache Tomcat

    MySQL

    See more
    OpenResty logo

    OpenResty

    2.2K
    189
    0
    Turning Nginx into a Full-fledged Web App Server
    2.2K
    189
    + 1
    0
    PROS OF OPENRESTY
      Be the first to leave a pro
      CONS OF OPENRESTY
        Be the first to leave a con

        related OpenResty posts

        Chris McFadden
        VP, Engineering at SparkPost · | 7 upvotes · 253.4K views
        Shared insights
        on
        NGINXNGINXOpenRestyOpenRestyLuaLua
        at

        We use nginx and OpenResty as our API proxy running on EC2 for auth, caching, and some rate limiting for our dozens of microservices. Since OpenResty support embedded Lua we were able to write a custom access module that calls out to our authentication service with the resource, method, and access token. If that succeeds then critical account info is passed down to the underlying microservice. This proxy approach keeps all authentication and authorization in one place and provides a unified CX for our API users. Nginx is fast and cheap to run though we are always exploring alternatives that are also economical. What do you use?

        See more

        At Kong while building an internal tool, we struggled to route metrics to Prometheus and logs to Logstash without incurring too much latency in our metrics collection.

        We replaced nginx with OpenResty on the edge of our tool which allowed us to use the lua-nginx-module to run Lua code that captures metrics and records telemetry data during every request’s log phase. Our code then pushes the metrics to a local aggregator process (written in Go) which in turn exposes them in Prometheus Exposition Format for consumption by Prometheus. This solution reduced the number of components we needed to maintain and is fast thanks to NGINX and LuaJIT.

        See more
        LiteSpeed logo

        LiteSpeed

        2K
        96
        0
        A drop-in Apache replacement and the leading high-performance, high-scalability server
        2K
        96
        + 1
        0
        PROS OF LITESPEED
          Be the first to leave a pro
          CONS OF LITESPEED
            Be the first to leave a con

            related LiteSpeed posts

            Passenger logo

            Passenger

            1.4K
            270
            199
            A fast and robust web server and application server for Ruby, Python and Node.js
            1.4K
            270
            + 1
            199
            PROS OF PASSENGER
            • 43
              Nginx integration
            • 36
              Great for rails
            • 21
              Fast web server
            • 19
              Free
            • 15
              Lightweight
            • 14
              Scalable
            • 13
              Rolling restarts
            • 10
              Multithreading
            • 9
              Out-of-process architecture
            • 6
              Low-bandwidth
            • 2
              Virtually infinitely scalable
            • 2
              Deployment error resistance
            • 2
              Mass deployment
            • 2
              High-latency
            • 1
              Many of its good features are only enterprise level
            • 1
              Apache integration
            • 1
              Secure
            • 1
              Asynchronous I/O
            • 1
              Multiple programming language support
            CONS OF PASSENGER
            • 0
              Cost (some features require paid/pro)

            related Passenger posts

            Gunicorn logo

            Gunicorn

            857
            728
            76
            A Python WSGI HTTP Server for UNIX
            857
            728
            + 1
            76
            PROS OF GUNICORN
            • 34
              Python
            • 30
              Easy setup
            • 7
              Reliable
            • 3
              Fast
            • 2
              Light
            CONS OF GUNICORN
              Be the first to leave a con

              related Gunicorn posts

              Pierre Chapuis

              Unlike our frontend, we chose Flask, a microframework, for our backend. We use it with Python 3 and Gunicorn.

              One of the reasons was that I have significant experience with this framework. However, it also was a rather straightforward choice given that our backend almost only serves REST APIs, and that most of the work is talking to the database with SQLAlchemy .

              We could have gone with something like Hug but it is kind of early. We might revisit that decision for new services later on.

              See more

              I use Gunicorn because does one thing - it’s a WSGI HTTP server - and it does it well. Deploy it quickly and easily, and let the rest of your stack do what the rest of your stack does well, wherever that may be.

              uWSGI “aims at developing a full stack for building hosting services” - if that’s a thing you need then ok, but I like the principle of doing one thing well, and I deploy to platforms like Heroku and AWS Elastic Beanstalk where the rest of the “hosting service” is provided and managed for me.

              See more