fmII
Fri, Jul 18th home | browse | articles | contact | chat | submit | faq | newsletter | about | stats | scoop 19:19 UTC
in
Section
login «
register «
recover password «
[Project] add release | add branch | add screenshot | broken links | change owner | email subscribers | update project | update branch (urls) [Project]

 LiteSpeed Web Server - Standard branch
Sections: Mac OS X, Unix

 

Added: Tue, Jul 1st 2003 20:07 UTC (5 years, 0 months ago) Updated: Mon, Nov 19th 2007 18:31 UTC (8 months, 2 days ago)


Screenshot About:
LiteSpeed Web Server is a high-performance, secure, easy-to-use, and Apache interchangeable Web server. It supports HTTP/1.1, SSL, CGI, FastCGI, LSAPI, PHP, JSP, Servlets, GZIP compression, chroot, IP level throttling, connection accounting, DoS attack prevention, and instant recovery mechanisms. With its Apache compatible rewrite engine, .htaccess, and MS FrontPage support, migration is quick and easy. A Web interface is included for administration and configuration. It can be used as a content accelerator, compression proxy, or a security guard running in front of any Web and application server.

Author:
LiteSpeed Technologies [contact developer]

Rating:
8.56/10.00 (10 votes)

Homepage:
http://www.litespeedtech.com/
Tar/GZ:
http://www.litespeedtech.com/products/webserver/download/
Changelog:
http://www.litespeedtech.com/products/webserver/changelog/
Demo site:
http://www.litespeedtech.com/products/webserver/demo/

Trove categories: [change]
[Development Status]  6 - Mature
[License]  Freeware, Other/Proprietary License with Free Trial
[Operating System]  MacOS X, POSIX :: BSD :: FreeBSD, POSIX :: Linux, POSIX :: SunOS/Solaris, Unix
[Programming Language]  C++, Perl, PHP, Python, Ruby
[Topic]  Internet :: Proxy Servers, Internet :: WWW/HTTP :: HTTP Servers

Dependencies: [change]
No dependencies filed

 
Project admins: [change]
» LiteSpeed Technologies (Owner)

» Rating: 8.56/10.00 (Rank N/A)
» Vitality: 0.10% (Rank 1097)
» Popularity: 6.10% (Rank 506)

project statsdownload stats
(click to enlarge graphs)
   Record hits: 87,796
   URL hits: 38,318
   Subscribers: 111

Other projects from the same categories:
DeleGate
aStatSpam
Schroedinger
apt-zeroconf
LSID Resolution Stacks

Users who subscribed to this project also subscribed to:
ImageSpace
DSPAM phpControlCenter
ddclient
IANA /etc Files
KernelDriver


Add comment · Rate this project · Subscribe to new releases · Ignore this project · Email this project to a friend · Project record in XML

 Branches

Branch Version Last release License URLs
Standard 3.3 20-Nov-2007 Freeware Homepage Tar/GZ Changelog
Development 2.1RC3 31-Aug-2005 Freeware Homepage Tar/GZ
Enterprise 2.2 25-Aug-2006 Other/Proprietary License with Free Trial Homepage Tar/GZ Changelog
Professional 1.5 Pro 28-Jun-2004 Other/Proprietary License with Free Trial Homepage Tar/GZ

 Comments

[»] chroot
by phr3ak - Sep 27th 2007 11:07:26

chroot is really working?

[reply] [top]


[»] Dmg
by Jpn - Mar 7th 2006 01:16:53

where's the .Dmg for Mac OSX?

[reply] [top]


[»] Great Job
by johnnymason - May 16th 2005 14:41:47

Excellent results so far. Looking forward to future improvements!

--
Free Ringtones

[reply] [top]


[»] one of the best servers out there!
by Mario Micklisch - Aug 23rd 2004 09:32:33

using it now for more than a year and deploying it on more servers :)

switched from apache to it and not only the administration is foolproof .. it's really more robust & much faster than apache and most of the other webserver-projects :-)

[reply] [top]


[»] Great webserver
by eisman - Aug 14th 2004 01:31:24

This is a great webserver, I liked it so much that I wrote a
review/howto on it.

It is easy in use, easy to handle and fast.

--
Greetings, S. R. Eissens

[reply] [top]


[»] Updated Benchmark vs. Apache and TUX
by LiteSpeed Technologies - Jul 15th 2003 10:47:48

Please see our updated benchmark page http://litespeedtech.com/benchmark.html. New benchmark includes throttling, LiteSpeed Pro vs. TUX with faster CPU.

--
LiteSpeed Web Server Faster, Easier and Safer!

[reply] [top]


[»] License of "Freeware" isn't very free
by Nevyn - Jul 9th 2003 13:16:24

IMO it'd be better for the project to remove the "Freeware" moniker on the license and just stick with "Other/Proprietary License with Free Trial" given that you can't get the source.

[reply] [top]


    [»] Re: License of "Freeware" isn't very free
    by LiteSpeed Technologies - Jul 9th 2003 13:53:52

    Freeware does not mean the source code has to be published, we did not claim it is G(L)PL or BSD license. There are planty Freeware projects published on freshmeat.net do not publish their source code. We do not see any problem with our license claim as our Standard Edition is absolutely FREE for any purposes of use, even commercial.

    --
    LiteSpeed Web Server Faster, Easier and Safer!

    [reply] [top]


    [»] Re: License of "Freeware" isn't very free
    by LiteSpeed Technologies - Jul 15th 2003 11:33:13

    Our goal is to provide an easy to use, secure and high performance web server product with the best value for all level of users instead of a so so open source project. Close source is easier for us to maintain the quality, performance and security.
    However, we do consider releasing some libraries, like our lightweight STL replacement, under LGPL or BSD license in the near further. If you really want to help, please help us test the web server.
    Thank you for showing your interest in our product and sorry if you feel that you had been allured by the “Freeware” license.

    --
    LiteSpeed Web Server Faster, Easier and Safer!

    [reply] [top]


      [»] Re: License of "Freeware" isn't very free
      by Greg A. Woods - May 2nd 2007 22:00:29

      I also really dislike the idea of binary-only BLOBs being labeled as "freeware" on Freshmeat. It definitely goes against the spirit of anything I would expect to find labeled as "freeware". I expect freeware to have source available.


      > Our goal is to provide an easy to use,
      > secure and high performance web server
      > product with the best value for all
      > level of users instead of a so so open
      > source project. Close source is easier
      > for us to maintain the quality,
      > performance and security.

      That sounds like a pile of VERY poor excuses.

      Closed source software is NOT actually easier to maintain, and in fact it's likely going to be of much lower quality and performance, and have less security too, than if you published your source code.

      You simply cannot hope to attain the highest levels of quality, performance, and security without having far more eyes than just your own looking at your code.

      Note that just because your code is open sourced doesn't mean you have to accept changes back or even allow for redistribution, and you can definitely restrict redistribution of modified copies (though that's beginning to go against the spirit of open source). I.e. you don't have to follow common open source development practices just because you publish your source code for everyone to examine, fix, change, and build for themselves.

      I for one would never ever have looked at your product in the first place if I had known the source was unavailable.

      --
      Greg A. Woods

      [reply] [top]




© Copyright 2008 SourceForge, Inc., All Rights Reserved.
About freshmeat.net •  Privacy Statement •  Terms of Use •  Trademark Guidelines •  Advertise •  Contact Us • 
ThinkGeek •  Slashdot  •  ITMJ •  Linux.com •  NewsForge  •  SourceForge.net  •  Surveys •  Jobs •  PriceGrabber