LiteSpeed isn't free but is great.

Apache uses a lot of CPU and LiteSpeed don't use that much of CPU.

LiteSpeed does have a free version, and is really great. The speed of my websites improved.

I will suggest for "Apache" as it is free and if you maintain your server it will provide you high performance.

If you're after light-weight, high-speed web servers take a look at Cherokee and Light-HTTP.

litespeed is a +1 selling point. but, apache plain and simple.

Apache is free but LiteSpeed is good in speed and its better for handling high traffic sites and it is completely Apache interchangeable so LiteSpeed Web Server can quickly replace a major bottleneck in your existing web delivery platform.

To be honest, if Apache is optimized then it can some times be just as good as lite speed, though it depends on how you decide to set it up.

I was about to say.. there's nothing LS can do that apache can't.. except cost money of course

Even though Lite Speed has it's strong-points, I definitely would still go for Apache.

It seems to work perfect for me so far.

LightSpeed if you have the money.

Light speed if you pretend to use maximum power of your servers.

Optimizing Apache could also save you a lot of money.

Yes, I think everyone pretty much agrees on the same. Apache is stable, free but can get bogged down.

Litespeed is great for busy servers.

I suggest having two servers with one on each. I say this because some users might like apache more and others litespeed. In addition you can benchmark both and see what one is more suited for your needs.

I would recommend apache over any. just my personal preference.

LiteSpeed is lot faster than apache, specially the enterprise version. Given the high traffic you get, I think you should make the switch. it totally worth it.

Steven
Thesslstore
**************