So far, I haven't been able to find anyone who beaten Rackshack's dedicated server prices, especially for their bandwith and hd space. I have checked out quite a few dedicated solutions, including Rackspace. As I've heard, Rackspace has very good support, but its prices are 10x more than Rackshack's. The only dedicated solution that has come close is Webreseller's dedicated server, but I believe they ridded of that a couple of weeks ago. I'm just asking if anyone knows of anyone who has come close to Rackshack's prices, along with their bandwith and hd space.

tranxactglobal is going to be offering 500 gig of transfer starting June 1st not sure of the pricing yet but I think it will be competitive, Webreseller better support than rackshack, Nocster is offering the same pricing as Rackshack.

Those are the 3 I can think of.

Monte

I've been with RackShack for a month now with an Intel P4 server. So far so good with 100% uptime and a speedy network. Considering the hardware and bandwidth I got, I am very happy with the excellent value.

As Monte said, the others I considered before deciding to go with RackShack were tranxactglobal.com, eservers.biz (partners), and webreseller.com.

I decided against webreseller.com because I couldn't get a handle on who they were - no pictures of their data center are available for over a month now, and a move is planned (which could be a disruption or time to shake out any glitches). Also I was uneasy that every time I emailed I got the same person, and email to the address on their website seemed to go to /dev/null/. Their special prices look great, and many people speak highly of them, but I like detailed info up front. It sounds like they treat existing customers very well but are weak on presales.

Likewise regarding tranxactglobal.com - once you have a server there, existing customers say support is great, but because of the deals they're offering and the fact that sailor (jhinkle) is the only one who does presales for them, it can take a while to get your server setup with them. So you have to plan way ahead. I really like their one-time-fee hardware upgrades rather than having to pay every month for an extra hard drive or more ram.

Eservers.biz looks pretty good. The only thing which I don't like about eservers.biz is that they don't honor their 100% uptime SLA making it 100% worthless (see the recent incident in this forum), and I would prefer a lesser SLA if it were honored.

RackShack's advantages are that they have lots of people (it may take a while to get something fixed via trouble tickets, but at least someone is always going to be there and you do get phone support), lots of hardware (servers setup within a few minutes), and most importantly, lots of bandwidth and network connections. They have lines from Verio, Time Warner, Savvis, ELI, and Cogent. Take a look at their network graphs: http://rackshack.net/aboutus/networks.asp The Verio and Time Warner Gigabit links are a definite selling point.

Rackshack also has active forums which have a very real value.

If you do go with RackShack, I would advise you to get one of the Compaq's or Intels and stay away from the Durons - the AMD Durons seem to have many more problems than the other servers. Also if you will be running a large site or forum, etc. make sure you get a server which can have a ram upgrade to 1 GB rather than topping out at 512 KB.

<<PM or Email offers directly to the thread starter, do not post to the forum>>

Originally posted by PoleCat2
Dont lie!!!!!!

CHeckout http://www*********

THey have NO setup fee and charge $99 a month for a awesome linux server.

I know I have one with them and its Uberfast!!! Are you related to them? Or did you just have an urge to spam this forum with their URL?

No i dont work for them and I live in the UK, they are in Texas. :P

Oh wait, I fly there every day and back ,just to work on servers. :)
And they pay my concord ticket daily.

lol!

Oh wait, I fly there every day and back ,just to work on servers

That's not a decent argument, as more admins than not never see their boxes I venture to say. Until this week I had never seen any of the machines that run my sites.

And there seem to be a large percentage of hosting companies based in the UK with physical gear hosted in the US. (Substitute Canada, Australia, etc for UK).

I was just pricing co-location in Canada vs the US - the cheapest Canadian co-lo is more expensive than the most expensive US co-lo.

So in the US my sites and machines shall stay!

Originally posted by PoleCat2
No i dont work for them and I live in the UK, they are in Texas. :P

Oh wait, I fly there every day and back ,just to work on servers. :)
And they pay my concord ticket daily.

lol!

Kids... :angry:

Hmmm...I would actually be interested in learning more about serverbeach.com. It seems however, that most people, including me, would much rather prefer to go with support rather than low prices. I have never heard of serverbeach.com and I have never even heard somone link to them or talk about them. That is probably a good sign that they aren't a good choice for most of us.

For me, I have limited cash, which prevents me from looking into places like rackspace and other dedicated solutions.

From what I can tell serverbeach is brand new - I don't know if they have any customers yet - their domain is registered through Go Daddy but I don't seem to be able to find a create date for the domain like you can with most other registrars - anyone?

Before even considering serverbeach I would ask for details on who they are using for bandwidth (redundant or cogent-only?) and also for detailed specs on their servers (motherboard and nic brand, chipset, etc.) and datacenter - are they staffed 24/7 at the datacenter? Is it their own datacenter or someone else's?

I haven't come across serverbeach yet although they do own a large block of IP addresses

ServerBeach.com (NETBLK-SBCIS-043002133006) SBCIS-043002133006
66.139.72.0 - 66.139.79.255

My trace went through Southwestern BellInternet Services so they look like they may have some infrastructure in place.

Anyone here got a server with them? If so is it as good as the site says?

Don't know them but while browsing their I managed to find a user review of them via their own review submission system - an angry customer.

Go figure :rolleyes:

Affinity Hosting just launched a $99 dedicated server offer:

http://www.affinity.com/

I wouldn't have noticed it, but they took out a 2 page ad in the latest issue of Hosting Tech comparing their service to the service provided by "That Hosting Shack" :D.

Except they pre install WU-FTPD ugh!

I can't find a dedicated server on the Affinity site for $99/month - the only $99 plan I can find is for "flex hosting" what ever that is, powered by Ensim, which gives you:
1 GB Disk Space
25 GB Data Transfer
Add 1 GB for $50 :confused:
From $99/mo
Setup: $150

The cheapest dedicated server there that I see is a 1 Ghz Celeron with 64 MB of Ram and a single 40 GB IDE disk and 50GB Data Transfer for $199/month and a $199 setup.

I wonder what that ad said comparing them with RackShack? The comparison would seem to lean very heavily in RackShack's favor (Rackshack for half the price gives you 8x the bandwidth, a faster CPU, 8x as much Ram, a bigger faster hard drive, etc.)

WebReseller has dedicated servers. They are semi-manged.

Originally posted by panopticon

I wonder what that ad said comparing them with RackShack? The comparison would seem to lean very heavily in RackShack's favor (Rackshack for half the price gives you 8x the bandwidth, a faster CPU, 8x as much Ram, a bigger faster hard drive, etc.)

To be honest, I am not sure...I just thought the hosting shack reference was funny ;) . I'll check the ad when I get home tonite and tell you what it said.

Although I am pretty sure they were comparing dedicated server to dedicated server because it had a dedicated server sitting all by its lonesome on the hosting shack side and the same dedicated server sitting surrounded by 10 or so Affinity staff (who apparently all dress in suits to administer your server :D).

1 GB Data Transfer for $50 :eek: Those are rates I normally only see here in the Netherlands.

JD

Good observation AcuNett :)

Found this in serverbeach.com's FAQ:

What is your policy on bandwidth?
Bandwidth is a shared resource. Our network is burstable, however, excessive use or abuse of these shared network resources by one customer may have a negative impact on other customers. Misuse of network resources in a manner which impairs network performance is prohibited by this policy and may result in termination of your account.



Shouldn't that read something like (as per their offering 400 GB are included with each server) "... overage bandwidth will be billed at $x per Gig ...etc" ?

1) I wouldn't trust a server hosting company with their site seemingly made from one of those ecommerce carts.

2) They only offer one IP per server.... Don't know what you can do with that.

I was just pricing co-location in Canada vs the US - the cheapest Canadian co-lo is more expensive than the most expensive US co-lo.

Not necessarily true.
See http://www.ultraservers.co.uk/

Gordon

Originally posted by GordonH
See http://www.ultraservers.co.uk/


Additional Bandwidth- £5 per gig

I don't think that quite compares with the cheapest US rates.

The claim was that the cheapest Canadian was more expensive than the most expensive US.

£5 per GB is less than what Alabanza and some others charge.

Also you would probably find if you were leasing rather than colocating that a server would come with 50 or 100GB included in the price and the unit cost would be lower.

Gordon

Does any one actually know what hardware they use on Rackshack servers?

I bet its a all-in-one board with built in video, lan, and so on.
Most of these systems you can find from a mom and pops computer stores for around $300.

What about backups, do they offer this option just incase of harddrive failure.

no
they don't offer backups
and my guess is that its cheap hardware, why? becuase today they are doing a "ram test" on my amd athlon xp 1900 server for the 3rd time. they have given me a new server, re installed my os, all in 2 days, and still problems. rackshack is awesome if you know what you're doing, and you dont get a melon

so as i am typing this they are doing yet ,another ram test.. you would think that after they change ur ram for the second time, they woudl test the new ram huh? but they don't. if they did i wouldnt have to have my ram tested for a third time now. i have had my server for 18 or so days and i haven't been able to use it because all it does is seg fault, crash, and all they do is change my ram and reinstall..

sigh

RE Cheapest Canadian co-location being more expensive than the most expensive US...

That was me. It was if anything only a mild exageration. And I was speaking of the whole package - co-location - not just bandwidth.

Any quality co-lo place in Canada is outrageously expensive, at least in small quantities. For a few 1U servers, its crazy.

And £5 per gig is very expensive compared to even quality US rates. About equal with off the shelf rates in Canada.

Telecom costs have always been expensive up here. I remember 56K lines to San Jose from Vancouver used to cost me 3500 monthly and 90% of the cost was 30 miles from Vancouver to the border.

Which is why all my hosting and now co-location is in the US.

Originally posted by hostrack
Does any one actually know what hardware they use on Rackshack servers?

I bet its a all-in-one board with built in video, lan, and so on.
Most of these systems you can find from a mom and pops computer stores for around $300.I have to give them some credit here. I got a rackshack Compaq DL320 server which is all A quality components. You can get them starting from $119/month, which IMHO is a terrific value.

I don't understand the people that go for the $99 white box and then complain about the hardware quality. If someone is so worried about A quality components they should have spend $20 more and gotten a Compaq.

JD

Rackshack is more than ok, you get more than you pay for. But i guess you should not put/have all your servers with just one provider, as even the best could have some troubles ~ nat. disasters..etc :)

I'm about to pull out the checkbook for a box with these guys: serveroutsource.net

Haven't heard anything bad about them yet, and they (well, the one guy I've corresponded with) seems real friendly, though generally not the fastest to respond to mails -- probably just flooded with mail like everyone else.

serveroutsource.net does look actually quite promising. However, I wish they would post the availablilty of their services. I wish all dedicated server companies did this, it would make it easier on the client.