Hi.

I'm looking for dedicated Windows NT servers.

Celeron 600 or P3-500 + CPU
128MB of RAM, but would love 256MB
Windows NT 4.0 or Windows 2000
PCAnywhere
20GB/month to 50GB/month

I'm in Seattle, but would be willing to take a server in Seattle, Portland, or California (want good routing to local customers).

Budget is $250/month, want a month to month contract. Looking for cheaper if possible...

Check out http://www.ecui.com

-BW

Funny!
He asked for west coast, not east coast! You can just get a map to figure out :D

cheers,
:beer:

Sorry did not see that, although location means nothing.. It all boils down to connectivity... For instance when I access sites that are hosted 10 miles from me I am literally routed all over the net before I access them.. So basically I think your first priority would be to find a host whom has good peering arrangements with the providers in your area or has good peering in general..

My two cents..

-BW

i for one wouldn't want to be anywhere near the power crisis in california...ive seen ads on slashdot about rackspace dropping the setup fee for servers moving from california, guess they want to cash in for the long term.

I got an offer from HE.net about their new NOC at Fremont, CA. Makes me wonder, with all these power crisis, how come they seem to still dare bring customers to their NOC at Fremont while some other NOC try to get their customers out of California? How severe is the power crisis, btw?

To to original poster, StephenRS, I could not find such a deal as you described. However, if east coast is fine with you, you may also try pwebtech.com in addition to ECUI.com. If you can have a little more room on your budget, try weinbar.com (not in California, in Arizona though).

cheers,
:beer:

BW - I am NOT some net newbie. My site has very specialized needs, and YES -- there area actually major internet routes that go all the way from Seattle down to LA. Almost every major backbone provider uses the same basic routing paths. If a specific ISP doesn't have the right peering, I'll eliminate them... but most do. Around here it is typically Qwest / Sprintlink / MCI / BPN ... and the routes aren't that different.

My site has some unique needs to talk to some specifics hosts on these parths and I would prefer a provider located in these areas. I can work with them on the routing once I find one that fits my other needs.

I keep finding providers that fit my price and bandwidth needs, but they are in Florida, Washington DC, Boston, etc.

I'd love to find a place in Seattle, but it is just not price competitive. I have yet to find a ISP who has a clue about my needs. They want to charge an arm and a leg for a server with 384MB of RAM which is one of the requirements of my site. Again, I've found places on the east coast that allow me to configure a leased server the way I want, but I'm wanting a west server.

dektong -- thanks for the comment. Sounds like you are finding the same thing as me -- east coast deals but not as much on the west. I appreciate that it isn't just me :)

I don't even care about the power outages. This is a second site, I already have one on the east coast. A million other things can go wrong, that is why I have two sites.

I just want a decent price for a decent system. I'm not after some super-perfect site, nor am I after some lowball site that has a super-congested network. Good price, good quality.

Here on the west cast, there seems to be a big penalty for Windows NT vs. Linux servers. I've found dozens of Linux servers for $99/month... it does NOT cost an extra $200 a month to run the same bandwidth to a Windows NT 4 / Win2K Server! The Win2K license is NOT THAT expensive. Some of these ISP's are cutting their own throat with this type of crap.

Other rant: It doesn't cost $50/month to install an extra 128MB of RAM either. One time fee of $150 would seem acceptable, but trying to add a monthly cost to RAM is just at attempt to extort money.

When are the ISP's going to get it? More RAM in my server means I can service more customers -- which means MORE BANDWIDTH, and that is what an ISP has that I don't have :) Charge me for bandwidth usage, not a monthly fee on RAM.

Some of the east cost providers have already figured these things out, I just can't find any on the west... serverless in Seattle.

dektong -- HE.net is located in a good place, but their price seems really high. Just looking at their shared hosting.. what is the deal with their pricing?

$60/month gets you "Business Virtual" 20GB bandwidth, 200MB disk space. $300 month "VIP Virtual" gets you 50GB bandwidth, 500MB of disk space.

Am I missing something :) I could get THREE of the cheaper $60/month plans and have 60GB bandwidth and 600MB of space... just spread my site contents across three different host names :) And be paying less than HALF.

<<Admin edit : post deleted for breaching forum guidelines>>

COME ON, thier was a power problem for a little bit, now the power problem is getting better. Its ONLY in SOME areas anyway. So please, enough with all the generalism, I cant take anymore. Power in areas, such as southern california has been good, with as many rolling blackouts as any other city in a given year. I work 7 days a week at my building in Yorba Linda, and hmm, never seen one blackout or power outage? ever..

Besides, think about it, even in the most horrible power sectors in california, power outages dont last for long, and if the server company is really a good company, it has generators to cap that problem like nothing. I mean, those servers do draw the juice, and a little down time does mean alot of generated watts, but all in all, i think it would and could only affect a company if it were in the hotspot of rolling blackouts.

Once agian, please stop the california power outage generalizing facts..

This thread is dead, I already selected my provider... Weinbar. Close enough to the West Coast for me. Relative to the "center" of the "Internet west coast" they have proven to be very close to San Jose in terms of routing.

Thanks.