I am planning on developing several websites and need some hosts for them. They are going to be relatively small, but uptime is a major factor. I was wondering if I should look into the location of the webhost/server since the viewers will primarily be on the west coast (US)

To most people who purchase web hosting, the location of the server does not. As long as it's reasonably fast. However, there are a few people out there that will want to know the location of the server. Especially if it's Cross-Continental - because this can slow down the speed at which data is sent and received.

Personally, if it's just for hosting, I don't care where the server is. However, if it's a Gaming Server, then Location is one of the most crucial parts of the package.

Having the server near to you would get you ping replies of about 31ms, however, one that's across in Europe, or elsewhere in the world could increase your ping reply to 100ms. For hosting, these replies are fine, but when it comes to Gaming (Quake, CounterStrike, etc.) these are just no good, and will cause the game to have problems.

thanks, i do not plan on hosting any types of games. this will be strictly webhosting :) thanks for the reply

No problem, perhaps other people have views on this too (in fact, i know they will!)

Originally posted by stugster
Having the server near to you would get you ping replies of about 31ms, however, one that's across in Europe, or elsewhere in the world could increase your ping reply to 100ms. For hosting, these replies are fine, but when it comes to Gaming (Quake, CounterStrike, etc.) these are just no good, and will cause the game to have problems.

true! not wonder last time when i play CS, i was killed hundreds of times, then i realised the ping was 110ms or higher, i still can play but my bullets can't fly so fast to kill. :flamethr: ping is important for game servers.

If the UK data protection act was followed and enforced a little more then a whole lot more people would care where their servers were. As all the people running forums and collecting personal data and exporting it to their web site in the USA would have to be registered.

Location of servers could also matter if, for example, a host was run from this country and the servers were in the US simply because they may not have much control in the event of a really big mess up (i.e. they might not be able to fix them themselves because of the distance).

vu

I'd say yes. I think location can matter quite a bit when your target audience is mostly local.

- Better response times. Ping certainly isn't an end-all measurement, but any dsl/cable user can feel the difference between 30ms and 120ms when navigating a site. Hosting locally (presuming a decent network provider) reduces latency and generally makes sites 'feel faster' for local users.

- Better network uptime. Most uptime issues are with hosts themselves, but presuming they're already good, the next largest problem is transit providers going down or losing capacity during maintenance or disaster. Serving from backbones closest to the customer reduces that possibility to some extent. A major disaster or network outage in Atlanta isn't very likely to affect LA hosts or their customers.

- Local 'confidence' for the webmaster. Assuming all else is equal, hosting from a facility near your target business can boost their confidence in the service by perception alone. End users may not care where it's hosted, but the webmaster probably does. Saying "In San Jose's premier facility" means a lot to a San Jose webmaster and just knowing where the servers are is a nice reassurance for businesses.


In the end, chosing a host which provides service, uptime and price you're comfortable with should override a local physical location, but if you can have both... I'd recommend it.

I don't think location will matter as much as connectivity. If the server is connected to the world via quality providers then you should do ok no matter where it's actual location.

I would say location should be a factor, however, should not be the number 1 factor. For instance, if you were appealing to Pacific (malaysia, japan,etc) audiences, it's a good idea to have a host on the west coast.

Originally posted by snickn
I would say location should be a factor, however, should not be the number 1 factor. For instance, if you were appealing to Pacific (malaysia, japan,etc) audiences, it's a good idea to have a host on the west coast.

I agree! Even though it would not be much of A diffrence, faster transfer is always good

There are plenty of hosts to choose from from in your area,

I have Gameservers hosted in Dallas Texas and still only ping around 45-50ms (I'm in Cali) So for webhosting you should have no problem finding something.