Hello,

I came across UnitedColo, AtWebHost, ServerOutResource, all these are cheap, but i am not comfortable, as for atwebhost, they have too less posts in their forums (maybe they have too less members), UnitedColo(heared about a lot of downtime) and the same with serveroutresource.

What do you guys say about them.
Which can be the most reliable of these 3 ??

I would say atwebhost among the 3.

Atwebhost is new, thus the lack of forum posts, but they do seem to be reliable and I know they take care of their customers (I'm not one of them, just read a few praise posts and have talked to Kyo a few times in the past).

UnitedColo does have the reputation of a lot of downtime, but that was before they changed their routing, which now no longer goes over Cogent outgoing. I just signed up for a server there. The server was misconfigured, but their tech support has told me they'll be fixing the issue today, so they do seem to reply to tech support issues quite promptly. Time will tell whether the uptime issue has been resolved. Speeds I've been getting have been quite good for the price, usually just over 1 MB/s. Basicly just signed up to take them for a test drive.

Can't say anything about Serveroutsourve.

Downtime can actually happen to anyone. Usually, 1 client among 30 others is enough to give bad impact. And downtime may not happen to the aggregate network. I would recommend to talk to each representative and find out more information regarding their network. I'm sure they will have reasonable explanations :)

Well, even though atwebhost is new, ^Kyo/Asher has been personally offering dedicated servers and has been around for some time.

This is the same people that run hostcharge.

I know Kyo has been around for a long time, just saying the atwebhost venture is new :)

Kyo has a good reputation and I'll stand up for him anytime. God knows I've asked him for so many quotes and sent so many PM's to him and never actually signed up, yet he has never said a word about it and every time I contacted him he's just kindly answered my questions and given me his best wishes.

AtWebHost is OWNED by the same people who OWN HostCharge :)

I guess the @webhost is not that good beacuse they seen very very new company and has a high set-up fee...

That show's that he does not have that much cash reserves and does not focus this as a good our blasting company that's goin to sell lot's off dedicated and people will stay long times on there servers...


I think United is the best on these 3 beacuse they have Internap backbone and they don't have set-up fees.....


Good luck it the chose :)

Originally posted by hostingsp
I guess the @webhost is not that good beacuse they seen very very new company and has a high set-up fee...

That show's that he does not have that much cash reserves and does not focus this as a good our blasting company that's goin to sell lot's off dedicated and people will stay long times on there servers...


I think United is the best on these 3 beacuse they have Internap backbone and they don't have set-up fees.....


Good luck it the chose :)


By the way, for your info, unitedcolo does not have any of their own backbone directly with internap, etc. Also, how can you judge a company by their setup fee? Personally, I would analyse it from the operating costs point of view rather than setuo fees. If a host does not charge setup fees, what does it show? Does it show a company who has a lot of funds, reserves, etc?

Then i am sure the best one among these is at webhost, i have asked Kyo for server quotes a lot of times and never bought one long ago. :D same as tazzman did.

I have never heared about any downtimes with them, and if they are running hostcharge, they won't get bankrupt, seems reliable :) .

Hello,
We have been with @webhost for around two months now and I can assure you that although this company may be new they 1) Know what they are doing and do it good (Brilliantly in fact) and 2) they most certainly look after their customers.

All members of staff DO go out of their way to esnure your stay at @webhost is as smooth and hassle free as possible. Infact right now I want to thank both (James & jonathan - these guys are good and I do mean real good) and Asher for the support they have offered my company.

Look no further pople @webhost has arrived and is one of the most professional yet peronsal companies I have dealt with.

Thanks Guys!

p.s from now on anything posted about @webhost I will be involved in becuase these guys deserve it.

you can try unitedcolo now
they are more stable these day and their connection is really fast

you can try unitedcolo now
they are more stable these day and their connection is really fastDitto, just got a server with them to play with. Installing Redhat updates, constant speed of 1.1 MB/s, which is 10 times what I ever saw on my old FDCservers crate. Looks like the server is on a 10 MBIT port though as it won't go much further than that, but for $99 a month, I certainly won't complain. I certainly seem to be getting my monies worth with this one. Their support also seems OK (not great, but not bad either).

Sam,
Thanks :)

It looks like i must go with @webhost :D

I would do a little more investigating before going with atwebhost.

It looks like they are yet another Cogent only provider - their only uplink to the net is through Cogent (cogentco.com).

Cogent is the "bargain basement" of transit providers. They sell 100Mbps connection to ISPs for $3,000 a month ($30 per Mbps). Despite its acquisition of Netrail and *some* of PSInet's US network, Cogent's network performance is still mediocre at best and its peering poor to say the least.

Another problem is that Cogent is not profitable. They are burning through their cash rapidly. Unless they do something soon to boost revenues they will be bankrupt in about a year.

Do you want to invest time and effort into a server that only has a single connection to a provider that may be gone in 12 months?

it seems as if every few months, someone new comes here and says cogent only has another few months of business left in them.

Do you want to invest time and effort into a server that only has a single connection to a provider that may be gone in 12 months?


Thank god there is another brain than me here :)

Unitedcolo + Internap Backbone ROX !!!:beer:

good call on the single connection, id hessitate to say cogent willonly last 12 months though. if you knew about cogent you would know they are restructuring and repricing. they also have plenty of reserves to burn through.

I don't think it matters which provider you go with, single homed just does not work. I wouldn't put a server with anyone who is just single homed.

Isn't atwebhost verio + cogent I'm pretty sure they are. I also hear there adding more connections soon.

Paul_9cy,

@WebHost (Asher) is using the same upstream/network we are - Wholesalebandwidth.com.

Currently this bandwidth is Multihomed Cogent & NTT/Verio.



David

Originally posted by Paul_9cy
Isn't atwebhost verio + cogent I'm pretty sure they are. I also hear there adding more connections soon.

@WebHost is currently in the proccess of moving away from Cogent. We hope to have our new, non-Cogent infrastructure up by the 15th of next month.

If you have any further questions, feel free to contact me directly. Thanks.

-- Jonathan

I would just like to clarify one thing, our bandwidth is currently from Wholesalebandwidth (cogent with verio redundancy) however we are already in the process of setting up new DS3's and 100mb fast-e connections from various other providers which are Aleron, Verio, Internap and Epik (absolutely no cogent), other providers are also being considered. Our bandwidth will be blended with BGP4. If you have any questions feel free to email me.

Ashar.

Ive been with @webhost for 6 weeks. There was some downtime at the start but that seems to be fixed now and things have been running smoothly.

These guys have the best support you can possibly offer! You can always contact somebody when you need them.

I have personally dealt with Asher, James and Clark and they have been extremely helpful and gone out of there way for me on many ocassions.

I would recommend them to anybody!


Cormac

Asher,

You might want to try Global Crossing.

Yes, them. They are emerging from bankruptcy. Last I heard they were offering a 100 Mbps connection at $55 a Meg.

Btw, do you offer any other OSes? FreeBSD, OpenBSD, Debian? Or, at least, will you start offering RH 8.0?


Oh.....

Cogent has less than 100 Million in cash and a burn rate of about 30 Million a quarter. Do the math. Funny, I didn't notice anyone challenging my statement about Cogent's lack of performance or how poorly peered they are. :D

@webhost problem is the set-up fees !!!....


Lower our take that thing out and you might get more sales :)

Originally posted by hostingsp
@webhost problem is the set-up fees !!!....


Lower our take that thing out and you might get more sales :)

Our sales are fine. We will be having special deals with no setup fees for approximately a week after our new bandwith carriers come in.

The setup fees are there for a reason. They do have to somehow pay for the hardware. Might be an idea to have the option to pay higher monthlies with a lower or no setup fee though...

I jus think high montly and hi set-up don't work for me..The max. i will pay on a set-up is $40-50 beacuse i just rent the server i don't buy it soh i will not pay $100-300.

<<Removed: You'll have to explain it without flaming others>>

If a ISP charges set-up fees means they don't know for how long the user it's goin to stay our like.. Why will i pay $100 our + if i don't know the quality on there services ?

When you order a DSL the company has a service quality to provide our they get busted by the Gov. in the net we don't have that, that's why i will not pay a set-up that's too high.

I just think a good ISP has to have profit. it mo. and realize that the set-up fee it's something they are goin to give in to there users in sign off a good service.
( and if the ISP it's good they will earn the set-up on it's mo. charges. )

nope it means that they are giving the user the chance to shift some of the monthly costs to one off. when you rent a server there is a recurring cost i.e. the bandwidth and a one off cost for the hardware, suppliers use setup costs to reduce the monthly cost for finance to their customers. personally i dont mind setups it means im not paying for credit i dont need.low setups are for people who need the credit and are willing to pay extra monthly. theres a break even point after which its all good for me :)

Oh, hostingsp :love: .

Better?