Hello,

Any recent comments on these guys, as I am looking at their servers since they are so cheap, + cheap Cpanel!

I have a server there. Been there for about a month. Great service all the way around.

i have server there for 4 weeks .... support has been great, server is also great ...

would be good if they keep having someone on their AIM, coz sometimes small issue will take few hours if you use the support ticket.

9 out of 10

hello,

i have been with nocster for about 2-3 weeks. everything is going very well so far. i would recommend them to anyone. good luck :)

Going great here as well :)

I have had my server since June 1 and am very happy with everything.

Well my server went down, I entered a ticket and got a response 191 hours later.....any questions regarding support?

Originally posted by dandanfirema
Well my server went down, I entered a ticket and got a response 191 hours later.....any questions regarding support?

I'm sorry but this is to hard to beleive.

Great service and I would recommend them to anyone. I had one problem and sent an email and it was fixed within 2 hours.

I agree. Here is the cut and paste from their page after they closed the ticket. The ticket was opened on they 20th. They responded asking for information and closed the ticket at the exact same time on the 28th. Glad I figured out how to fix it after they broke it trying to add some modules to apache after being asked not to fix it.


Opened At: 2002-06-20 10:20:39
Closed At: 2002-06-28 09:35:19
Duration Open: 191 hours 14 minutes

Well all my tickets have been fixed within hours. I'm not saying that you lie but I find it hard to beleive. I know that if theirs a open ticket sittign there for a few days they will close it if the user don't respond. So if you didn't respond it's your own fault.

Why should I have to respond to a ticket that they have not chosen to respond to me? Should I close my customers tickets a few days after they open them if they don't start complaining because I never answered? It is honestly quite insulting that you openly say that you don't believe what I am saying just because your experience is different than mine. I wish I knew why everyone is so happy with their service and most of my tickets go unanswered.

Can you send us the URL of your ticket? I'd like to see what happened.

I haven't been at Nocster long, but I've submitted a bunch of tickets and always get a quick response. I find it hard to believe it took that long to get back up and running.

And, if so, why didn't you call? It's made clear in the welcome letter that emergency calls (such as reboots) are OK even though they claim not to offer phone support. Or why not AIM BurstCSM or BurstNET? They're not always on but I'd say at least 80% of the time one or the other is.

dont order from them
they have bad support
bad staff
they are cheat company ,

I had several servers at burst.net
when they know I will leave them they formated 2 of our servers and thier backup HDD.

when u want order a server , they will give u what u need, but then u get the worst host in he world

<< kmh465 >>

Client issued a cancelation form, after we refused to negotiate "ridiculously" low pricing that he wanted, so we cancelled his account as was ordered/requested, and formatted the machines.

The guy wanted BurstNET bandwidth, at NOCSTER prices, and we refused to give it to him, so he got pissed off and left...end of story.

Sean R.
BurstNET

Hey I want burst bandwidth for nocster prices too. But I'm not going to pull a hissy fit over it.

Originally posted by NixHosting
Hey I want burst bandwidth for nocster prices too. But I'm not going to pull a hissy fit over it.

:laugh:

Some people will never learn and can never be satisfied. They want the world for nothing. :rolleyes:

Yes I also want a private VPN setup by 3am eastern standard time or I will cancel my $89 server and take my business elsewhere. Oh and since you offer dedicated 56k lines might as well throw that in there too. Please comply or I will post bad reviews on WHT.

Come on people you have to realize that even if nocster is getting the bandwidth at 30 cents per gb and they give you 300gb that adds up to $90. So pretty much I'm already ripping them off for $1 if I use all 300gb.

Now hardware comes in to play. As you can see the $89 only covers bandwidth. Unless nocster is growing hardware or has programmed robots to built it they have to buy it. So the initial $300-$400 for hardware may never be made back.

If there was a guy using all 300gb per month they wouldn't be making a dime off him. They are overselling just as rackshack does. Why don't people complain when rackshack oversells? People don't complain because they feel the cheaper it is the better off they are. This brings up another point, rackshack offers absolutely no software support once they plug your net cable in.

Here we have nocster offering managed servers for even cheaper prices. Want to know why people don't like nocster? Cause their parent company (burst) had some uptime issues. I can't think of one web host that hasn't had downtime.

In fact before I even knew nocster was opening I was going to go with rackshack. While I was trying to get the feel for the company I would hang in their IRC chat room all night and day. Just about everyday there was clients coming in and out complaining about downed routers.

Half the time the techs in the chat didn't even know what they were talking about. They knew the router was down and all they would say is whats your RS# and then we are working on the issue. This pretty much turned me away from their service. This happened as I said pretty much everyday.

Sorry for the rant but I can't stand when people compare the two companies as far as support and price. The only thing they offer that is similar is the amount of bandwidth. One is offering managed the other is offering BYOA (bring your own admin).

BYOA -- I like it! :)

Originally posted by BurstNET
The guy wanted BurstNET bandwidth, at NOCSTER prices, and we refused to give it to him, so he got pissed off and left...end of story.

Sean R.
BurstNET

Could s.o. please explain the difference between the BurstNet and the Nocster Bandwidth?


Also, how do BurstNet and Nocster compare to DV2?

Thank you!

Burst is on high end providers where the average gb may cost $1 up to $4 or even more. Nocster is geared to be mostly cogent where the bandwidth prices are fairly cheap. Majority of the time it can be had for under 50 cents.

Not sure about the second question.

Thank you!

Does anybody have experience with both Nocster and DV2? How do they compare?

Nocster will have the Cogent line Monday so you can tell the difference.

Originally posted by cyberdao
Does anybody have experience with both Nocster and DV2? How do they compare?

You can't really compare them -- Nocster offers managed servers, DV2 (tranxactglobal.com/eservers.biz) offers unmanaged servers.

Originally posted by FDrive


You can't really compare them -- Nocster offers managed servers, DV2 (tranxactglobal.com/eservers.biz) offers unmanaged servers.

I'm glad someone else realizes this. They are two totally different services.

This is what I'm a bit confused about...what does nocster include in their description of managed servers? free software/kernel upgrades and installs? firewall setup? control panel set up? dns setup? etc....surely they can't do all of that for only 100/month, so what is considered managed?

Free kernel upgrades so far. They haven't been exactly proactive about things like Apache and SSH updates, but I'm pretty sure they'd do those on request as well.

They also offer other ammenities as well, such as a backup service.

What's more, I don't think they'll suggest a restore on every little outtage, they have the experience necessary to tackle most typical Linux problems, and are easy to work with (so far). I've yet to be blown off the way I have been with other providers, and I just have one measly server with them that I am using for experimentation and some gratis hosting.

Originally posted by Hostworkz.com
BYOA -- I like it! :)

this term is really cool :agree: ;)

the difference is

BurstNET all the connections available
http://www.burst.net > find the network info ther

Nocster is 2 x 100mbit links .. 1 to Qwest ( Tier 1 ) .. and 1 to Cogent CO

i thought nocster was sprint + cogent?

We changed it to run on Cogent 100MBPS and Sprint OC3, instead of Qwest...
Reason for this is delays in getting Qwest line, as well as we decided would be better to run NOCSTER off two different fiber lines, instead of both Cogent/Qwest being pulled from Philly. The Sprint line is to their local POP in Scranton.
We'll be adding a third line sometime this year to the NOCSTER mix...

Sean R.
BurstNET

Originally posted by FDrive


You can't really compare them -- Nocster offers managed servers, DV2 (tranxactglobal.com/eservers.biz) offers unmanaged servers.

I was more interested in a comparison concerning speed / bandwidth (if you can compare this at all) between nocster and dv2.

spring oc3 + cogent mix. sounds good.

who will the 3rd provider be? if you can say...

Hello,
one of our box located at NocSter:
You can ping it. Network quality last 4 days is not so good.

Pinging servershost.net [64.191.4.21] with 32 bytes of data:

Reply from 64.191.4.21: bytes=32 time=47ms TTL=242
Reply from 64.191.4.21: bytes=32 time=47ms TTL=242
Request timed out.
Reply from 64.191.4.21: bytes=32 time=47ms TTL=242
Request timed out.
Reply from 64.191.4.21: bytes=32 time=47ms TTL=242


Ping Statistic :
Packet Sent = 6
Packet Received = 4
Lost = 2 <33% loss>

Ping from a server @venturesonline:

PING servershost.net (64.191.4.21) from 209.151.*.* : 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from 64.191.4.21: icmp_seq=0 ttl=243 time=63.818 msec
64 bytes from 64.191.4.21: icmp_seq=3 ttl=243 time=63.696 msec
64 bytes from 64.191.4.21: icmp_seq=1 ttl=243 time=2.532 sec
64 bytes from 64.191.4.21: icmp_seq=2 ttl=243 time=1.533 sec
64 bytes from 64.191.4.21: icmp_seq=4 ttl=243 time=152.189 msec
64 bytes from 64.191.4.21: icmp_seq=5 ttl=243 time=64.937 msec
64 bytes from 64.191.4.21: icmp_seq=6 ttl=243 time=67.682 msec

--- servershost.net ping statistics ---
9 packets transmitted, 7 packets received, 22% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max/mdev = 63.696/639.822/2532.839/921.308 ms

Behind a cogent line:

PING 64.191.4.21 (64.191.4.21): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 64.191.4.21: icmp_seq=0 ttl=244 time=97.347 ms
64 bytes from 64.191.4.21: icmp_seq=3 ttl=244 time=96.344 ms
64 bytes from 64.191.4.21: icmp_seq=1 ttl=244 time=3425.382 ms
64 bytes from 64.191.4.21: icmp_seq=2 ttl=244 time=2415.378 ms
64 bytes from 64.191.4.21: icmp_seq=5 ttl=244 time=94.261 ms
64 bytes from 64.191.4.21: icmp_seq=6 ttl=244 time=96.679 ms
64 bytes from 64.191.4.21: icmp_seq=8 ttl=244 time=97.370 ms
64 bytes from 64.191.4.21: icmp_seq=9 ttl=244 time=96.884 ms
64 bytes from 64.191.4.21: icmp_seq=10 ttl=244 time=97.050 ms
64 bytes from 64.191.4.21: icmp_seq=7 ttl=244 time=3767.070 ms
64 bytes from 64.191.4.21: icmp_seq=14 ttl=244 time=95.622 ms
64 bytes from 64.191.4.21: icmp_seq=11 ttl=244 time=3356.518 ms
64 bytes from 64.191.4.21: icmp_seq=13 ttl=244 time=1336.663 ms
^C
--- 64.191.4.21 ping statistics ---
17 packets transmitted, 13 packets received, 23% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 94.261/1159.428/3767.070/1452.050

Nocster? Burst? What's up?

Originally posted by masood
. . . . . . . . . What's up?. . . . . .Could be you.

PING 64.191.4.21 (64.191.4.21) from 65.125.226.130 : 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from 64.191.4.21: icmp_seq=1 ttl=247 time=19.955 msec
64 bytes from 64.191.4.21: icmp_seq=0 ttl=247 time=1.111 sec
64 bytes from 64.191.4.21: icmp_seq=2 ttl=247 time=49.960 msec
64 bytes from 64.191.4.21: icmp_seq=3 ttl=247 time=39.963 msec
64 bytes from 64.191.4.21: icmp_seq=4 ttl=247 time=49.963 msec
64 bytes from 64.191.4.21: icmp_seq=5 ttl=247 time=699.964 msec
64 bytes from 64.191.4.21: icmp_seq=6 ttl=247 time=79.966 msec
64 bytes from 64.191.4.21: icmp_seq=7 ttl=247 time=49.946 msec
64 bytes from 64.191.4.21: icmp_seq=9 ttl=247 time=39.967 msec
64 bytes from 64.191.4.21: icmp_seq=8 ttl=247 time=1.529 sec
64 bytes from 64.191.4.21: icmp_seq=10 ttl=247 time=29.965 msec
64 bytes from 64.191.4.21: icmp_seq=11 ttl=247 time=19.964 msec
64 bytes from 64.191.4.21: icmp_seq=13 ttl=247 time=19.967 msec
64 bytes from 64.191.4.21: icmp_seq=12 ttl=247 time=1.609 sec
64 bytes from 64.191.4.21: icmp_seq=14 ttl=247 time=39.966 msec
64 bytes from 64.191.4.21: icmp_seq=15 ttl=247 time=169.964 msec
64 bytes from 64.191.4.21: icmp_seq=16 ttl=247 time=59.964 msec
64 bytes from 64.191.4.21: icmp_seq=18 ttl=247 time=159.965 msec
64 bytes from 64.191.4.21: icmp_seq=17 ttl=247 time=1.159 sec

--- 64.191.4.21 ping statistics ---
19 packets transmitted, 19 packets received, 0% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max/mdev = 19.955/365.290/1609.962/540.298 ms

Originally posted by SoftWareRevue
Could be you.


hmm... seems like cogent problem? :o

From behind another ISP:

10 packets transmitted, 10 received, 0% loss, time 9095ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 78.195/81.270/93.370/4.281 ms

Good :cool:

I don't see Cogent in a trace yet.
Most likely ISP problems.

Masood, where are you located?

Originally posted by edude
Masood, where are you located?

Canada :cool:

The first ping was from within US behind a cogent line. Seems like that line is having problem. The second was from Canada behind rogers (nocster->sprint->teleglobe->rogers).

the difference between the BurstNet and the Nocster
BURST.NET is old name and everybody know they are the worst , then they want to cheat again by new name nocster.

u can search about burst.net in WHT
http://www.webhostingtalk.com/search.php?action=showresults&searchid=453510&sortby=lastpost&sortorder=descending

lol @ kmh, i don't think you should make such accusations without any proof :eek:

I tried their CPanel demo from the main page and did not have any luck, anyone else?

I keep tring the username/pasword sample and it will not let me in.

I don't think a search will bring up anything that's recent.
I'll admit that they used to have a difficult time dealing with the public in public. But, I know they have hired more staff. And, more importantly to me, they attend to my every need.

Originally posted by kmh465
the difference between the BurstNet and the Nocster
BURST.NET is old name and everybody know they are the worst , then they want to cheat again by new name nocster.

u can search about burst.net in WHT
http://www.webhostingtalk.com/search.php?action=showresults&searchid=453510&sortby=lastpost&sortorder=descending

I don't see where they are trying to hide anything. They don't atry to hide the fact that they are part of Burst, in fact, it says so on their front page. They seem to have had some problems in the past, mainly dealing with people, but these seem to have been fixed. They identified the problem, fixed it, and moved on. I think others should be willing to do the same.

If they knew about their problems and did nothing to try and solve them, then I would worry, and I would not have ordered a server from them. I didn't have to order from Nocster, they are not the only game in town, but I wanted to add a server in a different NOC, so I got one from Nocster to try them out. There are other companies out there that offer basicly the same services as Nocster, at the same price, but Nocster seemed to be trying harder than most to correct any problems they have had in the past, and that is the kind of company I want to deal with.

I'm sure that I'll catch it for this post, but hey, I'm sure I've been called worse. :cool:

Burst's support has come a LONG way from the way it used to be, back last year. We have been working with BurstNet since October or so of last year, and in the past few months, I can't remember one time when I had to call them and did NOT get someone on the phone. Even today, on the 4th of July, I was on the phone with a few of the support guys. I've been with VERY large ISPs such as Verio and OLM, all of which were charging us significantly more for services than we are paying at BurstNet, and I remember having to wait on hold for over 20 minutes for a tech to get on the phone and troubleshoot a problem. If you had a bad experience with burst's support in the past, I'm not surprised, but you'd be hard pressed to find better support from another ISP right now.

Alex

Originally posted by Brewer


I don't see where they are trying to hide anything. They don't atry to hide the fact that they are part of Burst, in fact, it says so on their front page. They seem to have had some problems in the past, mainly dealing with people, but these seem to have been fixed. They identified the problem, fixed it, and moved on. I think others should be willing to do the same.

If they knew about their problems and did nothing to try and solve them, then I would worry, and I would not have ordered a server from them. I didn't have to order from Nocster, they are not the only game in town, but I wanted to add a server in a different NOC, so I got one from Nocster to try them out. There are other companies out there that offer basicly the same services as Nocster, at the same price, but Nocster seemed to be trying harder than most to correct any problems they have had in the past, and that is the kind of company I want to deal with.

I'm sure that I'll catch it for this post, but hey, I'm sure I've been called worse. :cool:


Well said...

Originally posted by NixHosting


I'm sorry but this is to hard to beleive.

Don't find it too hard to believe. We have a server there for backup DNS reasons outside of our data center. It actually isn't a nocster server, but a $350/ mo. burst server. We had an issue we filed a ticket on about 3 weeks ago that has yet to be resolved. We could probably fix the problem ourselves, but on a matter of principle, I want to see how long this "managed" server takes to get fixed. I suspect we'll cancel this thing within 30 days...

I should mention that we have had this server there for over 15 months now....