I have been comparing plans, server prices and such and I have a question.

Why are RAQ's usually cheaper to rent as a dedicated servers than linux boxes? I see that I can get a linux box for cheaper than I can a new Raq but for some reason people attribute them to such things as $99 server deals. Maybe I'm missing something, but I just don't get it.

Because the only way you can sell these damn awful machines is to offer cheap rental on them and throw in loadsa bandwidth. :D

It's probably because it's a mass-produced specification and providers can get good discounts on the product when they buy it in bulk and then their discount can be sold onto you.

My guess is that hosting companies are subsidizing them on the basis that by pushing newbies onto RaQs they can reduce their support costs. After all, the market for $99/month dedicated "servers" is largely newbies who would create a support headache if they were placed on a real box.

One of our members has a site that might interest you:
http://www.99servers.com/

One reason I can see is that RaQs come complete with control panels, where as a control panel like CPanel will cost you $99/month (assuming you're not colo-ing or leasing at a place that offers them at a discount).

Some of the low-cost non-RaQ dedicateds I've seen come with Webmin. Webmin does a lot, but it's not the most user-friendly thing in the world, especially for end users (like hosting clients) who may not be all that tech savy. The RaQ control panel is pretty straightforward, even for novices.

intelligent got the exsact reason..... cobalt raq systems are very good machines, they run very fast, are responsive, upgradable, easy to maintain, and come complete with a control panel for both end users.

there is nothing wrong with raq servers, alot of the people who say things about them have not ever used them.

raq systems are nice little systems... host around 100-150 sites a server, and thats with 512Mb of ram. Could even do it with 256, but I like to make sure all sites run fast.

Of course a linux box is better, but when it comes down to it, it will not perform any differen't for 95% of hosted sites out there, a host who uses a linux box is hosting around 300-500 sites on that server compared to my 100-150, so it evens out.

It costs more to rent a linux box also so thats why you need to run more on it, and also the reason why it can handle more hosted sites.

There are small factors here and there..... Like the fact you can customize a linux box more than a cobalt raq (which also uses linux). But once again this won't affect most hosted sites.

The first box i got was a RaQ, I liked it, simply because it took to host about 5 seconds to get up and running, namely turning the power switch on and setting up the IP configuration.
That was it!, thats why most do not come with a setup fee of any kind, because there is nothing to actually setup, lol
The only reasons i moved from RaQ was because

1) it really wasnt secure enough for what i wanted to do

2) The host was useless (CobaltRack)

3) It was too customised and left you with no support if you went any where near SSH or Telnet

Thats when I went into the world of RedHat and have never turned back yet!

I will agree with "IntelligentHosting.com" it is the simplest thing i have ever come across, even easier than Windows! if i may say.

If you pay a $250 startup fee, and $99 a month for 1 year you will pay $1438 over the first year of renting a Cobalt Raq. If you go out and lease a Cobalt Raq 4r you would pay about $105 a month ($2957 total cost) a regular Cobalt 4 over 36 months would end up costing you about $42 dollars a month.
A 4i would come in at around $75 a month or so. I suspect it doesn't cost very much to build a system with
a free OS, and 400mhz processor either so SUN/Cobalt probably has a lot of room to work with the prices of these servers if you buy in bulk. Do you Think you could build a 700mhz PC that would run circles around a Cobalt for less than $400?? If you could what would you do with the extra $1700?

If you are transferring 100 GB a month or more you definitely are better off renting a rack for $99 a month than buying your own. Keep it for 2 years and then upgrade to something faster. The only thing you will be missing is a funky looking blue paper weight taking up valuable real estate on your desk.

All you have to do is divide the approx. cost of the system that you are renting by 12. This should give you an average depreciation for one year (I saw this somewhere on www.ISP-Planet.com) then factor in the monthly cost of the bandwidth you are anticipating on using, plus a support contract?, and colocation fees. . If the resulting number is significantly smaller by doing it yourself and you can sacrifice a bit of customer service/tech support then you may be better off owning. Dont forget to factor in what your time is worth too!

Did you know that Cobalt Raqs and Linux Boxes are the same size? :D Or am I wrong heh.....



______________
|[Floppy][ CD ] o| Linux or NT server

______________
|[Screen] ooo | Cobalt RAQ 3

I dunno I think Im lost.

Originally posted by Synergy
Did you know that Cobalt Raqs and Linux Boxes are the same size? :D Or am I wrong heh.....


Some are, some aren't. Almost all RaQs are 1U, while non-cobalt (ie. linux) machines are anywhere from 1U, 2U, 4U, etc.

Josh

Also, depending upon the size of equipment rack, it is sometimes possible (albeit likely a bloody nuisance) to mount Raq servers on both sides of the rack, since they are about half the depth of most 1U servers.

Originally posted by cperciva
Also, depending upon the size of equipment rack, it is sometimes possible (albeit likely a bloody nuisance) to mount Raq servers on both sides of the rack, since they are about half the depth of most 1U servers.

I don't think doing that would be a good idea -- wouldn't they overheat?

I had a Raq 3 once - Personally, I did not like it at all.

It was buggy and everything was proprietary. You cannot find much in terms of support and your Linux books are basically useless because of the interface.

Some people like them, I guess. But I could not get rid of mine fast enough.

Christy

avara, heat isn't all that big an issue since raqs don't generate all that much heat to begin with. You'd have much larger problems with a rack of 1U dual P3 systems. The main problem with mounting raqs on both sides of a rack (apart from the fact that some racks are assymetric which would make it impossible on those racks) is one of cabling; you'd have 84 ethernet and 84 power cables strung through the middle of a rack where they are completely inaccessible.

Originally posted by cperciva
Also, depending upon the size of equipment rack, it is sometimes possible (albeit likely a bloody nuisance) to mount Raq servers on both sides of the rack, since they are about half the depth of most 1U servers.

You need to pretty desperate for space to try that. ;)

Might as well just get rid of the racks altogether and stack 'em to the ceiling!

Originally posted by cperciva
Also, depending upon the size of equipment rack, it is sometimes possible (albeit likely a bloody nuisance) to mount Raq servers on both sides of the rack, since they are about half the depth of most 1U servers.

Wow...

Yeah this is possible, and I have heard of it being done. I am not so sure if overheating is as much of an issue since most RaQ's have a backup fan and if cooled correctly should not have a problem. I do agree that the ethernet and power cables running down or up the middle is pretty hazardous especially if one goes bad. The other thing is, what if you have to bring one up by serial console? Unless you have a serial concentrator that will be rough.

cobalt raq systems are very good machines, they run very fast, are responsive, upgradable, easy to maintain

1) Fast - Very relative. Simple sites, yes. Load them up, and the low RAM and CPU really gets spent.

2) Responsive - :confused: . Aren't all servers responsive?

3) Upgradeable - This is not even close to being true. These are appliances. The only thing you can upgrade in RAM, and you are very limited at that. CPU, no way. Motherboard, no way. Hard drive with sites, no way. Most importantly - Interface. Try telling RAQ2 customers that their boxes are upgradeable. You might get shot.

4) Easy to maintain - True. If you have a good host. When the GUI breaks down or you need to go to the command line, many Cobalt users are deer in headlights.

ckirby, I believe you host one box at H2O? Wait until you scale your business to 2 or 3 boxes. You will see why they are great boxes when you need training wheels (like we did when we started hosting), but when you want to remove those training wheels and really ride, you will find you are still on a bike with plastic wheels!!

Originally posted by UmBillyCord


When the GUI breaks down or you need to go to the command line, many Cobalt users are deer in headlights.


lol, true. But even via the command line you are limited with what you can do compared to a normal linux box. Cobalt's dont even have lsof among one of them. They also do not use LILO, they have their boot from rom/boot from disk methods.