Which would be a more appealing offer to you: if RackShack (following the thread of their new Gig E lines) or someone else (following the escalating bandwidth offers) offered more bandwidth or better quality bandwidth for the same price?

I think I'll make it a pole - which would you choose (for the same price):

250 GB of non-Cogent bandwidth is still a lot for $100-$130 per month. I don't think you'll see more than 100-130 GB of non-Cogent bandwidth for that price, except for Yipes.

Several vendors are coming down with rock bottom pricing these days. I know we have been taking a few quotes under $100/meg.. Which gets you pretty close to that. Broadwing, Lightning, Level3, Williams, and Qwest are all $60-$200/meg contenders based on quotes we have gotten out of 427 S LaSalle...

***This is NOT a slam on cogent***

I'd go with quality over quantity any day of the week. Ask yourself this question: how much is it worth to you to know that you don't have to worry about network outages?

I have personally found that the peace of mind that you get from quality providers more than makes up for the savings you get from cheap providers. I pay $900 per MBPS (actual usage billing) but in the past year I have not been paged even once due to a network outage. I must say, it has been worth every penny (especially during the 5 hours per night I try to sleep!)

Again, it's not a slam on cogent... I would love to get them in my area and think they can be a reliable solution as long as you have good redundancy... but just make sure you check everything out!:D

Originally posted by panopticon
Which would be a more appealing offer to you: if RackShack (following the thread of their new Gig E lines) or someone else (following the escalating bandwidth offers) offered more bandwidth or better quality bandwidth for the same price?

I think I'll make it a pole - which would you choose (for the same price):

The question is really irrelavent unless you more then the lower quantity.

The question is really irrelavent unless you more then the lower quantity.
? - don't understand.

What I've observed is that we are seeing more and more bandwidth being offered in a short time frame - it started at 300 GB, then 400 GB, then 600 GB with the RS special, then 500 GB with Mercury... I suppose this is in large part due to average use being but a fraction, but I would really like to see some non-cogent bandwidth being offered, still ample even if in much lower quantities, for a entry-level price. I was curious if others would buy such a package if it could be delivered or if I was the only one who would go for less but better quality in a second (but who still has a budget of only $150/month.) I think people have for example said Yipes is noticably more consistent than cogent right now, yet only webreseller is offering an package in this price/bandwidth range without having to toss cogent into the mix. I hope there is enough of a market for more mid-range quality bandwidth packages in between the $200-250/month tier 1 and the $100/month all you can eat (and more by the day) cogent offers.

I was really happy that RackShack is getting more non-cogent GigE's (though I don't know anything about Williams) as I have noticed a more lag since my server is pushing more bandwidth out cogent rather than verio over the past two weeks.

What im saying is the offers are irrelavent as you're comparing different amounts, either you need one or you need the other, you shuold be comparing prices on the same allotances if you want a more relavent survey.

But that would be irrelavent because it would be impossible - you're not going to see the same amount of better quality bandwidth for the exact same price, and if you did there would be no question (Would you like worse or better, the same amount for the same price? Interesting, another vote for better quality with no drawbacks and no price increases ;))

I wonder how many people who buy 400 GB Rackshack servers really need 400 GB of bandwidth?

For me what was a constant was my monthly budget. I found a few months ago that with $100-$130 a month I could either get 40-60 GB of good bandwidth (though most of these offers were actually more than my budget) or I could get 400 GB of partially cogent bandwidth.

I couldn't find any offers in between, which I found strange. I wanted more than 60 GB so I would have plenty of room to grow (currently using 30), but don't forsee myself passing 100 in the next 12 months. But it seems the $100/month offers have continued to expand the quantity of bandwidth available - e.g. the 500 GB / month Project Mercury, but I haven't seen more 100-200 GB slightly better quality bandwidth offers spring up.

To go further, I was disappointed by the fact that the numbers are big news (300!!!! 400!!! 500!!!) but at the same time when asked about providers Sailor said only "same as usual" in a manner of fact way which suggests that the quality of the bandwidth somehow isn't a big selling point. Is everyong just buying the biggest numbers for the best perceived value? Or do the majority of people buying these actually need *that* much bandwidth? Why aren't any new offers coming forward advertisng $100/month for 150 GB or 200 GB of faster bandwidth? Anyway that was the curiousity about what the market really was which made me post the poll.

Originally posted by panopticon

I wonder how many people who buy 400 GB Rackshack servers really need 400 GB of bandwidth?


Doesn't matter. Not everyone buys rs servers for the bw. Some do for the hardware. Besides, if I were to buy it for the hardware, (high spec machine), but only needed 30gb, i can't do nothing about it. Rackshack = fixed configurations.

you can't change much of it really, u get whatever is on the table, cant modify how much bw u want

in some ways i think cogent is great

in others i realize waht garbage cogent can be

I would go with the higher quality bandwidth, as long as the overages were reasonable.

I'd take the 250 GB of better quality non-cogent bandwidth