this is the third time my server crashed becuase of unreliable hardware.

They won't reboot it. (they claimed that they did which they didn't)
The whole support staff is gone (11AM san jose time there)
i can't contact them by phone. All i get is an answering machine


I am looosing tons of money becuase of their [mod edit: watch your language please] service.

does anyone feel what i feel?
I am cancelling that server and moving everything to a nocster server so this won't happen again. Their support is the best.

I have not had any problems with the managed.com servers i have running yet. Im sorry to hear you are.

Yes, id go with Nocster, ther support is excellent, I have still have servers with them :)

If I'm not wrong, it's all Racklogic machine, they're off high quality.

Originally posted by Mfjp
If I'm not wrong, it's all Racklogic machine, they're off high quality. why does it keep on crashing for absolute no reason? the server loads are EXTEMELY low (0.10 max most of the time 0.00 - 0.01)

Why would you risk losing "tons of money" with a new, untested provider like managed.com in the first place?

Sorry to say but if you pay very little what do you expect? Maybe you have learnt your lesson?

Originally posted by woolly
why does it keep on crashing for absolute no reason? the server loads are EXTEMELY low (0.10 max most of the time 0.00 - 0.01)

So because the load is low you assume it's a hardware issue? Have you bothered looking at your logs when the machine is up?

Their hardware may be decent, but I would look into the kernel. The 2 servers we attempted to setup there had bad images on them and we had to re-compile them ourselves just to get the server stable. Now their bad network design was a whole other can -o- worms. Needless to say we cancelled them even as backup servers, I would never recommend these clowns as a primary on anything.

Their support and service is shotty at the best.

well maybe if something is too good to be true, it most probably is.

but they guarantee 24/7 manual reboot service. If they can't guarantee that, then they shouldn't.

each reboot ticket takes forever to be answered.

Originally posted by MN-Robert
So because the load is low you assume it's a hardware issue? Have you bothered looking at your logs when the machine is up? the machine isn't up so i can't check the logs.

That was just my assumption, but since it happened for the third time exactly the same way i have not much doubt that it has something to do with teh server itself.

I don't think you read what I wrote



Originally posted by MN-Robert
So because the load is low you assume it's a hardware issue? Have you bothered looking at your logs when the machine is up?


So it has crashed three times, it could be anything..

Bad image
Kernel Panic

etc

Thanks God I have ordered FreeBSD instead of RH9 with them.
Until now, no issues with hardware nor with network (2 or 3 weeks running already).

Originally posted by MN-Robert
I don't think you read what I wrote




So it has crashed three times, it could be anything..

Bad image
Kernel Panic

etc i don't think that is my own fault either as even non-managed servers, the datacenter sets up the OS and compiles the kernel making sure just the essential parts of the server is functioning.

and it is called "managed.com" which is very misleading.

Originally posted by brainus_tech
Thanks God I have ordered FreeBSD instead of RH9 with them.
Until now, no issues with hardware nor with network (2 or 3 weeks running already). i am also using FreeBSD :(

decent service cost $$$

good service cost $$$$$$

excellent service cost $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

Originally posted by woolly
I am looosing tons of money becuase of their ****** service.

I think this is the first time I agree with Watcher_TVI. If you are loosing all this "ton of money" then surely you could have afforded to go with and would have wanted to go with an established dedicated provider??

Originally posted by dreamscape
I think this is the first time I agree with Watcher_TVI. If you are loosing all this "ton of money" then surely you could have afforded to go with and would have wanted to go with an established dedicated provider?? yeah, i was being risky and i wanted try a new provider since I thought they only have such a low price to attract new customers. They are new in the competition and it is sensible to say that they want to build a reputation and then slowly raising the price?


i guess i am wrong and i take this from experience.

And teh reason why i am loosing money is becuase i have to refund money to my clients on that server as i wasn't able to provide a decent service for them.

I also lost reputation as they gave negative feedback.

Next time i will not save money and go with a decent provider.

Originally posted by woolly
i don't think that is my own fault either as even non-managed servers, the datacenter sets up the OS and compiles the kernel making sure just the essential parts of the server is functioning.

and it is called "managed.com" which is very misleading.

Oh give me a break... good lord!

Managed.com provides an unmanaged server. I don't think there is anyone out there that doesn't know/agree with that.

Your problem could be anything, but of course, you come running in here to point the finger at your provider.

Sirius

Originally posted by Watcher_TVI
Why would you risk losing "tons of money" with a new, untested provider like managed.com in the first place?

I am getting this tight feeling in my chest and tingling sensation down my arm... I actually agree with you.

It cracks me up that someone would throw a production client on a server with a low cost, no reputation provider.

I'm the first to jump in here to defend the managed.com cry babies, but I also am smart enough to know to beat up my managed.com server for a few months, before putting any true business in to it.

Some people are thick skulled and have to learn the hard way.

Sirius

Originally posted by sirius
I am getting this tight feeling in my chest and tingling sensation down my arm... I actually agree with you.

It cracks me up that someone would throw a production client on a server with a low cost, no reputation provider.

I'm the first to jump in here to defend the managed.com cry babies, but I also am smart enough to know to beat up my managed.com server for a few months, before putting any true business in to it.

Some people are thick skulled and have to learn the hard way.

Sirius well i indeed learned my lesson.

maybe your logfiles are getting too big and aren't rotated? That, for instance, would crash the server, and it wouldn't be managed.com's fault... just as another example that it doesn't have to be hardware related at all

I've been a customer with managed for over a month now and had few problems. My server load has been 6.00 for the past few days due to four runaway (custom) processes that i had no time to fix and I have yet to have a problem with the hardware managed provides.

Perhaps the problem you are having is due to some custom software you have installed?

I am currently having a problem accessing my site however, looks like a network issue or DDOS agains't managed.com since their site isn't comming up eaither. :)

Personaly i agree with most of the other comments here, if your application is so mission critical and makes you money, why are you paying for budget hosting?

I've had my own issues with managed but my server hardware, network performance and OS image definately werent on that list. I just don't get what could be going on when every server I've worked on there is great and then people post stuff in here about how horrible thier experience was. Support may be bad there, I don't know cause I haven't used it. Reboots? I needed 1 manual reboot after a DOS and it was done in 7 minutes. Only issue I can complain about to date is the 2 week + wait for a clients server. We had some network issues but it turns out a noob admin was using 72 IPs that didn't belong to him and that was causing routing errors to my clients IP's. I've set up around 6 servers on managed's network so far, they all work great, they all have excellent speed and they all run stable. My own production server with them has been up 2 months now and I'm ready to use it for hosting now based on 2 months of solid uptime. Either the datacenter is divided into 2 worlds, or theres more to these stories than meets the eye.

Indeed.
We have had a box with them over a month , one routing issue (when they added layer42) and some Ip address assignment issues (in which it turned out I new there network better than they did (since they generally assign IPs in blocks of 10s to customers , they assigned a block of 10 to a foundry switch which was only using one of the block , which in turn freed up some IPs ) ....) and thats about it .
As far as the horry stories go I think a lot of dumb hosers who dont know how to manage a server signed up (personall guess as to all of the "managed.com fubarded my server threads" ) .That being said there could be some validity to the claims (I dont know) .
Also : there datacenter (from my understanding) is divided up into a number of different networks
Either way best of luck to managed.com

I agree. Best of luck to them. They are supplying a service at such a great price. Lets just give them a little bit of time to get over whatever they are experiencing... and hope they do that ASAP. lol.
I just want my server reboot :(

So many complaints about them lately, makes me wonder..

yer i know :rolleyes:

my server is on the 66.79.161.* block, and it is down atm. its been up and down, pinging out for the past 6hrs.

happening to anyone else?

Originally posted by sirius
Managed.com provides an unmanaged server. Okay, repeat after me... Managed.com provides UNmanaged server. Managed.com provides UNmanaged server... doesn't it sound just... weird? :)

It's like going to Burger King and getting Dominos Pizza.... :D

Originally posted by Homie

It's like going to Burger King and getting Dominos Pizza.... :D
Hmm burger pizzaa :-)

As a note : they are adding layer42 (again) to there bandwith mix and they seem to be having some routing issues (suprise suprise).

Originally posted by a-m
my server is on the 66.79.161.* block, and it is down atm. its been up and down, pinging out for the past 6hrs.

happening to anyone else?

I have a server on the same block and it is down. I also have a server on the 66.79.181.x block and it is up.

Originally posted by Homie
It's like going to Burger King and getting Dominos Pizza.... :D

McDonalds used to serve pizza... wasn't very good though.

Originally posted by Watcher_TVI
Why would you risk losing "tons of money" with a new, untested provider like managed.com in the first place?

No offence or anything but how would you think a service provider becomes tested if nobody is interested in subscribing to their service...doesn't make sense to me :eek:

Originally posted by dreamscape
McDonalds used to serve pizza... wasn't very good though. Exactly! ...So I don't understand how people sign up with a company who is using the word Managed in an Unmanaged environment. It's going against your logic sense, if you have one. :)

I imagine a group of people sitting and thinking on a domain name for their Unmanaged services.... "Hmmmm... I know!" says one of them.... lets use Managed.com! :roll2:

P.S. They are unmanaged, right? :)

Originally posted by a-m
my server is on the 66.79.161.* block, and it is down atm. its been up and down, pinging out for the past 6hrs.

happening to anyone else?

I also have a server in a similar block 66.79.167.* and it is pinging out for the past 6 hours as well.

66.79.187 down as well. hehehe

66.79.182.* down
66.79.185.* down

I hope they fix their problems asap. I would like to continue using them.

Had them for about 1 month, only needed reboot once, and I got lucky, they were available and did it fast.

Keeping fingers crossed. Hope won't have to switch to another host.

i am in 66.79.161.x and i am down right now also.

http://www.webhostingtalk.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=228291