Server Fault is a question and answer site for system and network administrators. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

Which is good for serving download in windows (w/o php and stuff)?

Apache 1

Apache 2

Win lighttpd

I consider this because some files contain unicode chars too.

share|improve this question
up vote 2 down vote accepted

I consider this because some files contain unicode chars too.

This doesn't matter. Files are just a bag of bits and bytes for the webserver - and if they are not, the webserver is broken by design.

For serving static files, I'd use a very lightweight webserver like lighttpd, nginx or gatling. Apache httpd 1.3/2.x could of course accomplish the same goal but it usually has a heavier memory footprint than one of the lightweight webservers.

share|improve this answer
Things might be more complicated if the files have unicode characters in their names rather than just in their content. But I agree that lighttpd or nginx (or similar) would be a better choice than Apache (or IIS) for static files. As the questioner is using Windows, sticking with IIS would be preferable to getting Apache going for the little benefit they might possibly see. – David Spillett Nov 23 '09 at 10:58

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.