We are currently evaluating purchasing our servers instead of renting them. This would be done on a 12 month contract and I would like others opinions.

We would keep all IP's and even the current servers, just move to a lease-to-own and colo.

Personally, I like the idea, but with hardware and software changing so rapidly............ :rolleyes:

I would like opinions straight on what you would do and a vote in the poll.

Any and all opinions would be appreciated.

Thanks,

what about you purchase them and when you upgrade to the newer/faster/whatever models you put the slightly older models into a pool of dedicated servers to rent to your customers who might be ready to make the jump as an affordable way to do so?

Might get you the best of both worlds, a little more life out of the servers and more income too. Customers get a deal out of it too.

If you buy a decent server now, and dont slack off trying to be cheap, your server will probably be in good condition in terms of technology, a year from now. 2 years from now might be iffy but you can either use it as a backup server then or for storage and etc.. or sell it as a cheaper dedicated solution like some do with celeron 1.3's and so forth now.

That is kind of what I was thinking. :) We currently have mostly Dual Processors servers, but some clients have single P4. So I was thinking if I could move them to dual boards w/ Singel processors when doing this the long term investment would be better.

This would allow us to upgrade them further in the future and increase the overall value of the server.

I would like to see the opinions of the people voting do not buy and why they are voting this way. I want opinions both ways. A vote isn't worth much without an opinion. :(

One main advantage of leasing from the DC would be a good hardware guarantee from the vendor. A quality datacenter will offer a 1 hour hardware replacement guarantee if a component fails. With a custom machine you run a small risk of the needed hardware not being on hand, and also the extra cost of buying replacement components from the data center and paying their technician to replace it when they have time available. They will likely prioritize repairs on their own leased out hardware over the co-los, but that's just an assumption.

Matt

Actually, these would be purchased from the DC. :) It's an option we didn't know was available and after discussion could lower our TCO.

That was one of my worries, which is why we hadn't done this as of yet. But with purchasing from the DC............

Thanks,

it really depends on your business plan, and what do you want to do in one or two years from now. if you have any plans for the "acquired" servers after a year, I say go ahead. or else you would probably end up with some extra slightly-outdated servers, and just thinking of how to get rid of them.

hope it helps.

We have a few leased servers which have been in place for two and a half to three years at $200+ per month. They were fairly top of the range at the time but you can do the math :)

If you have a server running accounts at a profitable level now, why should that change 1, 2 or 3 years down the line (assuming those clients stay with you)... as long as the server is still performing and serving the clients on that server why bother changing it? Or is there a proviso in your packages that the website will *always, for ever* be on a server with the latest and greatest technology?

Now that is one of the best arguments towards buying I have heard. ;)

I had that in the back of my mind. Do some more upgrading, say 4GB, 250GB, etc.. by why change the base server? It runs well, handles the accounts. If customers ask for a faster server, move them, and replace them with someone else. ;)

You may find that after a server is newly 'filled' the next year or so may see some clients from that server leave for one reason or another. This will allow space (in terms of hdd and resources) for the rest to grow... over that length of time the server will remain profitable (well, that depends on your packages and pricing but we won't get into that here) and stable so why change it.

I've found that if the level of server performance is right (uptime great, speed great) the clients on it couldn't care less what the exact specs of the machine are and whether it's top of the line at that time or not. Clients who request to move soley based on server spec (not many at all) are not usually granted this based on the above and the fact that it's not a good precedent to set (may result in a few hundred clients fighting for space on one new server with possibly 200 Mhz higher cpu clock speed).

The above assumes that the server isn't massively oversold in the first place btw..... if you've sold 500 GB space on a 120 GB HDD then it's probably asking for trouble further down the line. I mention above that there may be no future need for huge ram/hdd upgrades but this depends on how much space/resources have been sold on the server and how much you have available.

It also has to do with emerging technologies. In 6 months a server running fine with 2GB of ram may need 4GB to run a new technology that is out. :(

But I do understand what you are saying. :)

Originally posted by ddihosting
It also has to do with emerging technologies. In 6 months a server running fine with 2GB of ram may need 4GB to run a new technology that is out. :(

Slightly dramatic I think. Unless you're running every service under the sun and all sorts of high resource use programs, what are you likely to see in the next 6 months (purely related to software, etc... not increasing clients and their resource use) that will require you to have *double* the ram in your servers?

Ours from 2-3 years ago are still running nicely with the 1 GB they came with.

Well, windows. ;)

2GB on dual next step is 4GB. You shouldn't go to 3, although it is possible. :(

One thing to keep in mind about colo vs leasing is that with colo since you own the equipment, if you had problems with the DC or for whatever reason, you are flexible enough to move your servers. When we first started, all servers were leased. I ran into some problems with our DC's level of service (the DC at the time) and was in a very bad position. Needless to say, from that time forward we own all of our own equipment.

This is probably an obvious one, but I just wanted to put that out there as I didn't see it mentioned.

I agree that is definitely something to keep in mind.

I don't understand why so many people who voted don't buy aren't posting there opinions??

A vote is only as good as the opinion that goes with it. When you read through the opinions they carry more weight than just the vote. If you truly disagree with buying the hardware, please state why.