|Dedicated server hosting|
| 4:00 am on Dec 18, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Do any of you have any experience with any of these $100/mo. dedicated server offers?
I'm having trouble with my hosting company and I'm tired of haggling over configuration issues and such. I'm ready to just jump ship and go to a dedicated host, but don't have any experience or recommendations.
Any thoughts or ideas would be appreciated.
| 10:05 am on Dec 18, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Going off a shared server onto a dedicated one was the best business decision we ever made.
Now we have total flexibility, 99.9% reliability (a major concern to us before), configure whatever we want whenever we want, have better support, better performance, better spec, seriously powerful stats where before they were almost worthless.
All of the above = happy clients who recommend us to everyone :-)
We're in the UK though so I can't recommend a US supplier for you, just that the principal, for us, has been life-changing.
| 11:01 pm on Dec 23, 2003 (gmt 0)|
There are really two types. One is managed and one is unmanaged. I recommend a managed server, where the staff at the ISP keeps the server updated, backed up, patched, etc. Unmanaged are cheaper, but you do it all your own - only recommended for network admin types.
A managed server frees you from the idiotic moves of the others you are sharing a box with. Example: If someone on your box blasts out a spam, an ISP may blacklist that IP address and you find your emails are not getting to the recipients on that ISP. (Think about being blacklisted from AOL and the impact that could have)
I use a company called siteshack.net and have been very happy with the support. Imagine actually calling and having a human immediately answer the phone and fix your problem.
| 11:36 pm on Dec 23, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Dedicated servers require more attention but give you more control to it.
As JeffMull said, there are 2 types of servers:
Managed: Hosted somewhere else, and installed/setup by someone else but then, you have full control, I'd recommend www.rackshack.net (its got its name changed)
Unmanaged: You have to purchase everything, its hosted on your headquarters, you have full 100% control over it, although, if a problem arrives, you have to deal with it.
Good luck with it!
[edited by: heini at 12:05 pm (utc) on Dec. 25, 2003]
[edit reason] delinked [/edit]
| 11:10 am on Dec 24, 2003 (gmt 0)|
I use two dedicated providers with several servers at both:
1. Rackspace are the best without any doubt. You will be hard pushed to find anyone that says otherwise (even their competitors).
100% uptime in 2003, 24/7/365 live(toll-free phone) and very knowledgeable support, the most secure and one of the fastest networks.....only downside is the cost if you require a large amount of bandwidth/data transfer.
2. Serverbeach....Cheaper, primarily because of the 900mb data transfer allowance, but no live support. Ticket support system and forums are okay, but in an emergency you may have to wait 12 hours for a problem resolution if you can't fix it yourself.
For mission critical sites it has to be Rackspace, if you need something cheaper for a site that burns a lot of bandwidth then Serverbeach.
Whomever you choose dedicated is a whole different game to shared. It requires some technical knowledge, especially if you select a non-managed provider, but that is a tiny price to pay in comparison with the hassles shared providers cause.
I like the two mentioned above (I love Rackspace, except for the bills), I might give ev1servers.net(Rackshack) a whirl for the next server, I also also hear good things about them.
| 4:57 am on Dec 25, 2003 (gmt 0)|
In the UK i use OneandOne - great service, i see they are now starting up in the U.S, with managed servers from $69. They are even offering 3 years free hosting for smaller sites - see OneandOne.com
| 6:22 am on Dec 25, 2003 (gmt 0)|
|Rackspace are the best without any doubt. You will be hard pushed to find anyone that says otherwise (even their competitors). |
I've been using Rackspace for several years, and the uptime is great, but is essentially an unmanaged server, with the risks that entails.
I had a bad experience with them last year when my server was (for the first time) hacked. Their monitoring didn't spot the server was down (they set it up wrong), and then when I found the problem there was essentially no help they could offer. I had to order a new server from them, and was down for several days while they got around to configuring it. I was not happy - if it's a hardware problem on the server it'll be fixed quick but if you need a server replaced because of a software problem it takes days.
What's worse is they tried to get me to pay a much higher price for the new server, despite it being a replacement. Took some lengthy phone calls to eventually get the new machine at the previous price (had to sign a longer contract to do it).
Now, Redhat 7 support is being withdrawn (by Redhat) so Rackspace are telling customers that there will be limited support for that from next week, no security fixes etc. They're charging for replacement OS installs, after withdrawing the support in mid-contract.
I'm in the process of looking for a new dedicated server (probably managed) elsewhere. Uptime is great, but pointless if the software support (even at the basic level of reinstalling or replacing an OS) isn't included.