Hi: I was going to stay off this thread as I know of no local datacenter providers; but after taking a peek at www.slicehost.com I'm curious why it makes top choice?
Virtualized hosting has been around for some time. I can understand the appeal of not having to manage all the resources while retaining extensibility, some control, and admin access. But the pricing at slicehost is more expensive than many virt hosters and for only a few dollars more you can get real iron, w/lotsa IP addresses, your own NIC, lots more storage/throughput benes, AND the ability to slice up your own host(s)! I currently use rackmounted, have used serverbeach (reduced-cost rackmounted spinoff) and John's company; all w/out downtime or complaints (by and large). I suppose for personal consumption, a vhost solution would be fine, but If I was re-selling or hosting my own domains, I think I'd prefer my own dedicated hosts in the long run. What counter-arguments would make a virtual slice more attractive besides costing 20/month less? Rion On Monday 23 March 2009, jonathan d p ferguson wrote: > All: > > Thank you for your excellent suggestions, and thoughts about local > hosting companies. The main reason I wanted a local company was to > "keep the money local" as that is part of the Vermont ethic. That > being said, it is very clearly an economy of scale problem. > Virtualization goes a long way towards reducing that scale issue, I > must say. > > It appears that slicehost is at the top of the heap here. (I really > love that I can choose my distro!) > > Thanks again Vaguers! > > have a day.yad > jdpf >
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
