Hello,

Are cobolt raqs ok to use for a hosting provider for hosting clients sites on, or would a unix server be better?

Any help is appreciated.

Aloha
well A RAQ is a linux system just with a gui front end or control panel if you will call it such ;)


yes they can be very good for the money if you go through a place like rackshack.net to get one

a regular highend PC running linux will be better but will cost you more

first off find out what you want to offer and what you think your prospective clients are going to want.

so to start off with a raq can do you well but if money is not a major concern look into a beefier box to begin with with a company that can help you grow etc...

also depends on your leve of expertise to take care of a linux box ?
hope that helped some ???

Chad,

Thanks for your comments!

I was thinking of using rackshack.net, i dont have any knowledge of dedicated servers so the raq would be a good start, i have been told they are quite easy to setup.

Raq is actually design for web hosting purposes. There should not be any problems using raq to host web sites.

RAQ from Rackshack.net gives you a lot of bandwidth for you to burst and will save you a lot from getting a linux box.

Go ahead, and I am sure you can learn something from having a own raq.

Big hosting company like catalog.com, Tera-Byte, Rackshack, Yahoo also use RAQ for web hosting purposes.



:)

Aloha
fairly easy to use a few quirks one of which is when people make email accounts you have to make an alias to use the same name twice
do a search under the raq forum with something like email in the term
also there is a lot of help out ther for the raq so it can be a good learning box
the down side is backups are not so good and if you run intensive boards or something they can run slower but again bang for buck go for it ;)

I have a different opinion on this:

If you are trying to start a hosting company and suceed, I suggest getting a high end linux box instead of a raq.

Raqs are good with hosting like 50 sites. On the long run, there maybe problems with raqs such as the CPU, lack of User Control Panel.

A regular linux box doesn't cost too much as well but it gives you the ability to install CPs such as CPanel, upgrade hardware such as the CPU, dual cpu, 2 GB of Ram, scsi drives, tape drives, etc. Raqs these days can be cheap and comes with alot of bandwidth; however, you get what you pay for. If you are trying to suceed, a linux box is highly recommended with CPANEL.

With CPANEL and WHM:

You can create accounts with ease and setup resellers where even more profit comes in.
It is easier to manage where your users have alot more control over their resources such as MySQL DBs, Subdomains, Pop3 email, webmail, cgi scripts, webstats, etc.
Not only that, you can also have a cpanel theme where you can fully make your company more attractive. Take a look at Hostrocket and AletiaHosting, a average person will not know what type of control panel that they are using.

Well what can you do with a RAQ:

TeraByte is going to update their services by removing raq servers and providing linux boxes where Cpanel is offered (I fergot where I hear this from). I'm pretty sure if Rackshack.com offers the same bandwidth as other companies, people would not get a rack.

But its also a good Idea to start hosting with a raq where you can learn some linux administration hands on. I think most companies will switch to a higher end box as time come anyways.

-Just my 2 cents.

Synergy,

Thanks for your comments, am am reselling at the moment so my experience with servers is non-existant!! I plan to get a raq with rackshack for the next stage in my hosting business as this is one big learning curve for me, when i have the knowledge i will opt for a high end linux box.

:bomb: :smash: :puke: :uzi: :flamethr:

:uhh: Sorry that's what I think of cobalt raqs :crap:

ok.. so you are not a fan

RaQs can be used for site hosting providers. The main thing you should keep in mind as you make the decision of whether or not a RaQ is suitable for your needs is that the RaQ is considered to be a hosting appliance.

If you use the features that it is designed to supply, then it works very well. Indeed, it is fairly well set up to provide virtual site hosting. However, once you start to field requests from your customers asking for support of non-standard RaQ features, things become a bit more interesting. I am not saying that you cannot add features to a Raq, I am saying that it detracts from the "appliance" aspect of a RaQ.

For me, I am using my RaQ as a starting point to learn more about web hosting (like training wheels on a bicycle), it's a hobby thing for me. I found that I outgrew the RaQ in about three months. Now I am pondering getting a 1U server, and running Linux or FreeBSD for my next adventure.

The decision is yours. Look at what you want out of a dedicated server, then see if a RaQ provides the solution you need.

I am working in a web hosting company and my opnion is that raq is better solution comparitevely Highend Linux machine.:)

Originally posted by mithilesh
I am working in a web hosting company and my opnion is that raq is better solution comparitevely Highend Linux machine.:)

Really? Because here you don't seem to know the difference:
http://www.webhostingtalk.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=22242

:) mithilesh replies to posts he doesn't even read :D

I am now having second thoughts with the raq, the email alias seems very unprofessional. (I have understood it right that you cant have the same POP3 name twice on the raq, i.e. info@testing1.com and info@testing2.com.

Given that i have no experience in setting up a server, is it going to be mission impossible to setup a high end linux box?

You cannot have the same POP account, you are correct, however this is *not* specific to RaQs, any linux server you run will have this 'problem'. Aliasing another pop is the way to get around this (so that you can have the same user name for two seperate domains).

domain 1:
info@domain1.com

domain 2:
info2@domain2.com
alias info2 as info

This is just how it works universally.