I hope this question is not too ridiculous. Does anyone know of any webhosts that are similar to FutureQuest, but not quite as expensive?

After hanging around the FutureQuest forums, observing what goes on there and how the staff works, I've fallen absolutely in love with them. Their service seems to be top-notch, their support is incredible, and their attitude and business model is a breath of fresh air in the hosting business.

http://www.aota.net/forums/showthread.php?threadid=11646
This is a case where FQ handled a Slashdot'ed site. Impressive!

Unfortunately, I require some advanced features like MySQL databases, which are quite pricey at FQ. Of course, I don't blame FQ in any way for their pricing scheme; basically, you get what you pay for.

Therefore, I've been looking for webhosts with similar support systems and services as FQ. I'm currently using Aletia Hosting (www.aletiahosting.com). Support seems non-existent, server responses and uptime stats are quite poor. Can someone recommend some alternatives to FutureQuest?

I know I'm contradicting myself since I just said above, "you get what you pay for." I'm just wondering if there are any cheaper hosts out there that can even compare with FQ's service. I would settle for a decent host that is honest and "personal". Web hosts that actually communicate with the customers, keeping them in the loop no matter what happens, are hard to find. Most large webhosting companies are doomed since it is virtually impossible for them to be "personal".

Thanks.

I mean I would suggest putting out the extra $$$ if your site is that important to you.. Like you said above you get what you pay for.. You paid for cheap (ie: aletia) and look you got exactly what you paid for :D - You might by luck find somewhere really cheap with all the options you want but it is really worth it not knowing if it is going to be still there next month? To me it would be well worth it.. The only other thing I can suggest is doing a search on some hosts you are interested in and reading responses and investigating the same way you did FQ.

Take a serious look at what HostingMatters (http://hostingmatters.com) has to offer. I have been with them for almost 6 months and very happy with their service & support.

T-Dog, maybe you should pm Deb - she could work something out for you.

Futurequest is one of the best hosts in todays market :agree:

Originally posted by T-DoG
I hope this question is not too ridiculous. Does anyone know of any webhosts that are similar to FutureQuest, but not quite as expensive?

Their service seems to be top-notch, their support is incredible, and their attitude and business model is a breath of fresh air in the hosting business.

http://www.aota.net/forums/showthread.php?threadid=11646
This is a case where FQ handled a Slashdot'ed site. Impressive!

I'm currently using Aletia Hosting (www.aletiahosting.com). Support seems non-existent, server responses and uptime stats are quite poor.

Putting two and two together.... :rolleyes:
If you pay the extra couple of $$ a month whether it's FutureQuest, or Hostmatters, as mentioned previously, you'll get good service.

If you want to pay pocket change per month, then I don't think you have a lot of room for complaining.

Quality costs - for we, the providers.... these costs get passed onto you, the end user. That's why we don't offer you the world for the price of what happens to be in your back pocket.

Rest assured realistically priced hosts aren't all about to retire to the bahamas anytime soon - our 200+ day uptimes are due to quality products, that cost quality dollars.

If you want cheap, go for cheap.. If you want quality, then pull open that wallet, pull out that $10-20 for a mid sized plan, and sleep well at night knowing that we're out there making sure you're site stays online, all the time.

Greg Moore

Basically you get what you pay for. So the question is, is the savings more important, or the site? To some people, it's actually the savings, especially if their sites are not very popular or just a hobby. To many more others, it's the other way around.

I've been with a number of virtual hosts, including a couple that are *highly recommended* both here and every where else. All are cheaper than FQ, none are as good or better. In fact, I'm probably moving out from one of those highly recommended hosts soon.

Futurequest is a great host, that's right. But only 300MB (!) disk space + 20GB bandwidth = 59,95$/month... That's too expensive I think. Even with a great support. :)

Originally posted by Bot
Futurequest is a great host, that's right. But only 300MB (!) disk space + 20GB bandwidth = 59,95$/month... That's too expensive I think. Even with a great support. :)

It is all relevant. You might say a BMW 400 HP M5 is too expensive. I might say it was worth every penny!

Originally posted by UmBillyCord


It is all relevant. You might say a BMW 400 HP M5 is too expensive. I might say it was worth every penny!

Hmmm... I think a better comparison would be that $50K might be a fair price for a new cadillac; but $150K is way too expensive.

Just because something is more expensive does not mean it is better.

Thanks for the responses. I understand that I get what I pay for. That's why I already said that my post is a bit self-contradictory. I just wanted to know of some good hosts like FutureQuest that might be slightly less expensive. I'm not asking for good service and features for $10/month. However, instead of $40/month for MySQL, I was wondering if there are any slightly cheaper alternatives... $35, $30 maybe? A few dollars less each month adds up since my site will be an institutional site that won't be going away in a few months.

I will probably try my best to get the funding and host with FQ. It doesn't hurt to check out any good alternatives though.

Thanks again.

I apologize for elie

~MAB

Originally posted by elie
hey -

check out elitehosts.com - they probably have everything you need, especially the unlimited MySQL on most plans. Check out the customer quotes - great service!

:uzi: :spam:

Unlimited MySQL... that sounds a little stupid to me :rolleyes:

Originally posted by chrisb


Hmmm... I think a better comparison would be that $50K might be a fair price for a new cadillac; but $150K is way too expensive.

Just because something is more expensive does not mean it is better.

You pay for *proven* quality. That is the point. I feel, as do I bet the majority of their customers, that they are worth every penny. The person who's post I was replying too said they 'think' they are too expensive for what they offer. I say 10,000 others disagree.

Your example is using the assumption that *all* hosting is the same, so anything over an average is too expensive. This of course is not true. A cadallac built for Nascar is not too expensive if it was $150,000.

In any case, this person can easily find good service and quality for a little cheaper. It just won't have the FQ brand on it.

Why not check out http://www.focalhosting.com I believe they are in the same datacenter as Futurequest or I could be wrong. I have not used their services but have seen many great things said about them here

Shawn

Focal Hosting is interesting. They even offer free hosting to non-profit organizations. I don't think my university is actually non-profit though (they seem more like blood suckers to me :eek: ). Thanks for the link, Shawn.

EDIT: Hmm, technically, legally, my university is non-profit, actually. Does Focal have any uptime guarantee?

Originally posted by Scott
Take a serious look at what HostingMatters (http://hostingmatters.com) has to offer. I have been with them for almost 6 months and very happy with their service & support.

Hi Scott. Does HostingMatters offer any kind of uptime guarantee? I don't seem to see one on their website. Thanks.

Originally posted by gagsplus
Why not check out http://www.focalhosting.com I believe they are in the same datacenter as Futurequest or I could be wrong. That's probably wrong because FutureQuest has their own privately owned datacenter (http://www.visionquest.net/).

JD

I have been with FutureQuest for 18 months now and they are absolutely fabulous. There are several other good hosts around, but no one and I mean no one is near to the level of support and honesty FutureQuest provides. With pain in my heart I had to move one of my too popular sites to a dedicated server. For shared hosting there is no one better.

The fact that they seem expensive probably is a big factor in this. My theory is that they got this great support team because they pay them well and let them work normal hours. They have nothing but highly skilled support personal 24 hours per day. Never did I have to wait more than 15 minutes for a response. Even when it is 3am at their location. I almost got the impression that they have this internal "How fast can I get the perfect answer to the customer" contest.

So FutureQuest might seem a bit expensive, but if your site is important there's no better place to put it.

Enough praise I think. (and if you think I'm exaggerating, just read their public forum (http://www.aota.net/forums/))

Jan Derk

Yeh, I am completely sold on FQ. The only problem is funding. I might have to consider alternatives if I can't get approval for FQ's fees.

By the way, I just saw this:
http://www.visionquest.net/Uptime.php

That is sick! :smokin:

I've been reading the forums at Hosting Matters. They have an unusually large number of server reboots a month. That's not a very good sign.

Originally posted by gagsplus
Why not check out http://www.focalhosting.com I believe they are in the same datacenter as Futurequest or I could be wrong.
We're in Peak 10's remarkable Jacksonville, FL data center (www.peak-10.com). I believe FQ has their own, brand-spanking new DC.

Originally posted by allera
I believe FQ has their own, brand-spanking new DC.

according to thier site... you are correct :)

Originally posted by T-DoG
I've been reading the forums at Hosting Matters. They have an unusually large number of server reboots a month. That's not a very good sign.

"Unusually large"? Not particularly. I'd say our status page shows this pretty well, even with the NOC rebooting one of the servers accidentally last week.

I'd suggest you drop a note to FQ and just ask them if they'd be willing to cut you a deal on nonprofit hosting. They're a fine company - why move away without asking if they'd work with you on it?

Sorry. Maybe there aren't unusually many reboots. I was just comparing to FQ and Focal Hosting (by reading the forum announcements). FQ and FH both had several system updates but they didn't mention the need to reboot the servers. On HM's forum there seemed to be a lot more reboots looking at the last 60 days. No offense intended.

I am not moving away from FQ. I am considering the alternatives now in case my budget is not approved when I propose it in a few weeks. I want to get things running ASAP so I might as well be prepared.

I think you'll find that we announce almost everything to users even when they'd never notice otherwise. That's neither here nor there, though.

The fun of budgets, eh? I remember working on a grant item back in college... but that's another story and generates nightmares anyway. Who wants that? One of the things we did, though, was break the total cost into a per-week cost, which was favorably compared to some other pricing for the same type of thing at several of the Ivy League unis. Ultimately, between that comparison and the overall scope, the project was approved. Not sure if that would apply or help in your particular situation - just a thought.

Budgets. :) The ironic thing about my university is that it is mind-bogglingly wealthy, and yet it is incredibly stingy, especially when it comes to technology. Most of the school is on 10mbit, I'm ashamed to say, because they are too stingy to upgrade the routers. $40 a month should be a trivial amount, but I am not confident at all that they would approve that.

Thanks for your suggestion, Annette.

Anyway, back to talking about good webhosts. Mods, don't close this thread. :D

Originally posted by UmBillyCord


You pay for *proven* quality. That is the point. I feel, as do I bet the majority of their customers, that they are worth every penny. The person who's post I was replying too said they 'think' they are too expensive for what they offer. I say 10,000 others disagree.

Your example is using the assumption that *all* hosting is the same, so anything over an average is too expensive. This of course is not true. A cadallac built for Nascar is not too expensive if it was $150,000.

In any case, this person can easily find good service and quality for a little cheaper. It just won't have the FQ brand on it.

Perhaps, we agree. My whole point was that you pay extra most of the time for "branding", not necessarily because it's better. For example, I can buy an off-brand shirt of similar quality to Hillfiger, Polo, etc. for less than half their price.

To make a service comparison, I can have a kid mow my lawn for $20 or a landscaping company could do it for $50, and one may not do any better than the other.

In summary, people pay more because of branding and "perceived" reputation.