I feel pretty confident in saying for pure speed Apache has got it down on almost all other web servers. Then it becomes a matter of getting it onto a platform where the OS makes the smallest dent in the overall performance so Linux is your winner. There
are reasons for Win2K, but speed isn't it.
Why do people keep saying things like this without any benchmarks to back it up? I'm not saying you're flat out wrong, but at least drop a link to SOMETHING showing such a bold claim. It sort of reminds me of the NT days when everyone said how slow it was
compared to Linux/Apache and then the OSS guys finally got what they
wanted (the Open Benchmark) and the
benchmarks proved them wrong under thier own conditions. My point isn't that Windows is faster, it's that in the past everyone assumed Linux was faster and then when they are challenged, and agree to all conditions of the benchmark before hand, the results
show that the general knowledge that they were faster was infact wrong.