Hosts with 100Gb monthly transfer

whats a sensible and a silly price?

[fwordboy]

I had an interview today for a website that runs itself on a server that is located 3-4 hours away. The server is Linux and has mysql4/php4/apache2 and a massive 100gb transfer rate per month but, has not support whatsoever it also has no cpanel/webmail/phpmyadmin/stats/. If they want anything to be added they must manually configure it themselves - not the hosting company.

I asked why the server was so far away and without support and they replied how cheap it was...£50p/m. is this cheap? I'm quite novice to servers so but I'm not too sure it is. is it possible to find hosts who offer massive webspace and transfer but with support and cpanel/webmail/phpmyadmin/ for.

a) less
b) similar price
c) slightly more (e.g. £60 p/m)

p.s. I'm in UK but, that doesn't make a difference does it, right?

[moftary]

I have seen dedicated servers for around this and offering everything. However, you should know the difference between "managed" that's when your host will configure and take care of everything on your behalf, and "unmanaged" that's when you are on your own. Well, I suggest you to go with a virtual private server (vmware, virtuozzo, etc..).

[fwordboy]

i think they are currently with an unmanaged server. so i guess i should rephrase my question to do you think thye are paying too much for what they are getting and could they find an alternative without too much hassle?

[vincevincevince]

The price seems quite reasonable if you're able to get support at the datacentre level in the event of a non-responsive server (i.e. physical restart), entering fsck passwords...

[asprakash]

better you try hosting services provided from US. <snip>

[edited by: stuntdubl at 12:28 pm (utc) on May 26, 2005]
[edit reason] no urls please per TOS [webmasterworld.com] [/edit]

[JKMitchell]

better you try hosting services provided from US

Unless you have a UK facing site and want to rank very well in UK search engines.

But back to the topic, an unmanaged server with this bandwidth and support from the data centre in the event of reboots etc would be about the price you are quoting (although I'm struggling to find the 100Gb bandwidth for that price as I have a site that uses 45Gb per month which is close to the server limit at my current hosts).

I've had to install the control panels etc myself anyway - have you looked at webmin?

[andye]

That price isn't unreasonable.

Key issue: if you call their tech support for a reboot at 3am their time, do they answer the phone? Do you even get a phone number, or is it some kind of an online contact form?

I would strongly suggest giving their tech support a call and seeing what they're like *before* you sign the contract.

Personally I've moved over to managed hosting after a nightmare-type 'server down and hosting company uncontactable' experience. Now I pay more, but get the phone answered within 3 rings.

Best, a.

[bcc1234]

Somebody actually hosts stuff under vmware?
LOL, I would love to see that.

[Matt Probert]

We have a dedicated RaQ4 server, and 300 gB a month transfer which costs us slightly less than that. We pay $99 US which works out to be just under £60 a month (we are also in the UK).

We also get 24/7 service (tested on most days but not Christmas day).

This is with a reputable Canadian company, tera-byte.

Matt