Software Alternatives, Accelerators & Startups
Register | Login

HTTP VS micro_httpd

Compare HTTP VS micro_httpd and see what are their differences

Proton Drive for Business
End-to-end encrypted cloud storage built for teams. Keep all your business data private, fully secure, and under your complete control. No backdoors, no tracking, no compromises. Swiss privacy laws and zero-knowledge encryption protect what matters. featured
Contents:
  1. ยป Base Details
  2. ยป Reviews
  3. ยป Alternatives

HTTP logo HTTP

is an application protocol for distributed, collaborative, and hypermedia information systems.

micro_httpd logo micro_httpd

micro_httpd is a very small Unix-based HTTP server.
  • HTTP Landing page
    Landing page //
    2022-12-21
  • micro_httpd Landing page
    Landing page //
    2019-12-06

HTTP features and specs

  • Simplicity
    HTTP is a simple protocol that is easy to understand and implement, making it accessible for developers and widely adopted across the web.
  • Statelessness
    HTTP is stateless, meaning each request from a client to server is independent, which simplifies server design and allows for easier scaling.
  • Flexibility
    HTTP is designed to transport different types of data and supports a variety of methods (GET, POST, PUT, DELETE, etc.), making it flexible for various applications.
  • Extensibility
    HTTP supports extensions and new methods, headers, and functionalities can be added without breaking existing implementations.
  • Cacheability
    HTTP supports caching which can reduce latency and network congestion and improve efficiency by storing copies of resources closer to the client.

Possible disadvantages of HTTP

  • Overhead
    HTTP headers add overhead to requests and responses, which can impact performance, especially for small payloads.
  • Statelessness Complexity
    While statelessness simplifies the protocol, it complicates maintaining application state across requests, requiring additional mechanisms such as cookies or session tokens.
  • Security
    HTTP itself lacks encryption, making data vulnerable to interception and attack unless combined with SSL/TLS (as in HTTPS).
  • Performance Limitations
    HTTP/1.1 limits performance through sequential request-response patterns, leading to inefficiencies under high latency networks or with multiple small requests.
  • Resource Identification
    URLs can become complex and unwieldy when managing a large number of resources, leading to potential difficulties in resource management and organization.

micro_httpd features and specs

No features have been listed yet.

Analysis of micro_httpd

Overall verdict

  • micro_httpd is a solid, minimalist HTTP server that excels at simplicity and low resource usage, making it a good choice for lightweight, non-critical serving needs, though it lacks the features and performance of full-scale servers.

Why this product is good

  • Extremely small and simple codebase that is easy to audit and understand
  • Runs from inetd/xinetd, so it has essentially no memory footprint when idle
  • Handles basic static file serving, directory listings, and common MIME types
  • Free and open source from a reputable author (Jef Poskanzer of acme.com)
  • Portable and easy to compile on most Unix-like systems

Recommended for

  • Serving simple static websites or files with minimal overhead
  • Embedded systems or resource-constrained environments
  • Educational purposes and learning how a basic HTTP server works
  • Low-traffic internal or hobbyist projects that don't need advanced features
  • Situations where a lightweight server run via inetd/xinetd is preferred over a persistent daemon

Category Popularity

0-100% (relative to HTTP and micro_httpd)

HTTP

micro_httpd

Web Browsers
57 57%
Web Browsers
43% 43
Web And Application Servers
0 0%
Web And Application Servers
100% 100
Security
57 57%
Security
43% 43
VPN
55 55%
VPN
45% 45

User comments

Share your experience with using HTTP and micro_httpd. For example, how are they different and which one is better?
Log in or Post with

Social recommendations and mentions

Based on our record, HTTP seems to be more popular. It has been mentiond 9 times since March 2021. We are tracking product recommendations and mentions on various public social media platforms and blogs. They can help you identify which product is more popular and what people think of it.

HTTP mentions (9)

  • The History of HTTP
    HTTP/1.1 was first published as RFC 2068 (The Proposed Standard) in January 1997. HTTP/1.1 protocol was refined over two revisions, RFC 2616 published in June 1999 and RFC 7230-RFC 7235 published in June 2014 before the release of HTTP/2. The HTTP/1.1 standard (RFC 2616) remained stable for over 15 years. In 2022, HTTP/1.1 was updated again with RFC 9110 & RFC 9112. - Source: dev.to / 9 months ago
  • State management in Svelte apps
    HTTP was invented as a stateless protocol, which means that each request fully encapsulates all of the information necessary to return a correct response. So historically, web pages never had to worry about managing state - each request to a URL with parameters or with a form submission would receive a response with all of the HTML that the browser needed to render content. - Source: dev.to / almost 2 years ago
  • Evolving the Web: Discovering the History of HTTP Versions
    HTTP/1.1 was such a game changer for the Internet that it works so well that even through two revisions, RFC 2616 published in June 1999 and RFC 7230โ€“ RFC 7235 published in June 2014, HTTP/1.1 was extremely stable until the release of HTTP/2.0 in 2014โ€Šโ€”โ€ŠNearly 18 years later. Before continuing to the next section about HTTP/2.0, let us revisit what journey HTTP/1.1 has been through. - Source: dev.to / almost 3 years ago
  • Poll: Are client web requests sent to upstream servers or downstream servers?
    On the one hand, it just seems natural that "upstream" refers to the inbound request being sent from one system to another. It takes effort (connection pooling, throttling, retries, etc.) to make a request to an (upstream) dependency, just as it takes effort to swim upstream. The response is (usually) easy... Just return it... hence, "downstream". Recall the usual meaning of "upload" and "download". Upstream seems... - Source: Hacker News / over 4 years ago
  • How to cache TCP, SSL handshake on ALB?
    To me it sounds like youโ€™ve not solved this as the config youโ€™ve mentioned is about preventing โ€œillegalโ€ (none RFC7230 ) requests, it isnโ€™t really related to the problem you posted. Source: over 4 years ago
View more

micro_httpd mentions (0)

We have not tracked any mentions of micro_httpd yet. Tracking of micro_httpd recommendations started around Mar 2021.

What are some alternatives?

When comparing HTTP and micro_httpd, you can also consider the following products

IPFS - IPFS is the permanent web. A new peer-to-peer hypermedia protocol.

thttpd - thttpd is a simple, small, portable, fast, and secure HTTP server.

ZeroNet - ZeroNet. Open, free and uncensorable websites, using Bitcoin cryptography and BitTorrent network. Download for Windows 9. 6MB ยท Unpack ยท Run ZeroNet. exe.

mini_httpd - mini_httpd is a small HTTP server for low or medium traffic sites.

Microsoft IIS - Internet Information Services is a web server for Microsoft Windows

Apache Tomcat - An open source software implementation of the Java Servlet and JavaServer Pages technologies

Loading...