Is Uptime Overrated?

What do you think

hmmm

:rolleyes: (Thinking)

don't quite understand your question ... hmm ...:rolleyes:

cheers,
:beer:

of course, yes

You mean 100% uptime right?

I mean uptime period, including 100%, is it just overrated?

:rolleyes:

I think you want 99% uptime or higher, but I wouldn't pay a lot more for that guaranteed. 1% downtime means you lose 100 minutes, 48 seconds each week (or maybe i just cant multiply). That is quite a lot of time, whereas if you had 99.9% uptime you would only lose 10 minutes, 5 seconds per week. Paying for 100% is pointless unless you are going to make more money in those 10 minutes than you will pay for the extra guaranteed uptime.

1% is 432minutes of downtime per month which is pretty bad if it happens often.

It depends. A small personal site doesn't neet 99.999% uptime gaurentees. However an upcoming internet business web site that was just featured in that days' edition of the New York Time really can't handle the downtime because it would mean a potential large profit loss.

Originally posted by bahres
Is Uptime Overrated?

What do you think

hmmm

:rolleyes: (Thinking) hmmmm

:rolleyes: (voting)


Voting yes if you must know. Even though I think the question would be better served if it were more defined.

Yeah, having your website available everytime someone looks for it is really overrated -- unless you're one of those crackpots who expects your car to start every morning, expects the lights to go on when you flip the switch, and expects a dialtone every time you pick up the phone.

"JayC" - I agree the way you put it!

:D

Originally posted by JayC
Yeah, having your website available everytime someone looks for it is really overrated -- unless you're one of those crackpots who expects your car to start every morning, expects the lights to go on when you flip the switch, and expects a dialtone every time you pick up the phone. Which is exactly why I suggested the "poll" needed further verification.
If we're talking about the uptime guarantee by hosts; it's over rated.
If we're talking about a consumer wanting to access his site; well . . . . . .

"SoftWareRevue" - You could answer based on both!

That's why I asked the poll to get the opinion on either the answerer would still be the same either way?

Thanks
:)

Originally posted by bahres
"SoftWareRevue" - You could answer based on both!

That's why I asked the poll to get the opinion on either the answerer would still be the same either way?

Thanks
:) You mean; when you said, "I mean uptime period, including 100%, is it just overrated?"
That is to say that your poll is to answer based both as a consumer and as a host?




NOTE
Can a mod just take my yes vote off please?
I am just way too confused for polling purposes.

"SoftWareRevue" - Your toooo confused!

Your reply post can be on either but the poll is based on the concept of uptime! Do you think the concept is overrated!

Hope this helps

:)

Originally posted by bahres
"SoftWareRevue" - Your toooo confused!

Your reply post can be on either but the poll is based on the concept of uptime! Do you think the concept is overrated!

Hope this helps

:) Sorry doesn't help. :(
Good luck with your poll.

Sorry "SoftWareRevue"


:)