Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 76 to 91 of 91
  1. #76
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    451
    Personally.

    Lunarpages started off as a great company, then they went bad. Maybe after you left, I dont know.

    cPanel has pretty much been the same for .... 2 years? Maybe longer.

    Dinix? Whats a Dinix?

    Personally, and professionally. like James has said, VPS.net has done very good, but hasnt really changed. Lunarpages also the same. cPanel also the same thing.

    It seems like they got into the business to do as little as possible. I know for us we are continually trying to improve every aspect of our business. From Documentations, services, servers, ways of doing business.

    Like james said, You guys have no real reason to make silly claims. VPS.net should not have to do that. People will see through the BS and see that its all hype.
    Michael Wallace - michael@innoscale.net
    Innovative Scaling Technologies Inc. - A Cloud Service Provider
    24/7 Support, Call us @ 1-307-200-4880
    www.innoscale.net - Seattle, Silicon Valley, Dallas, Chicago, Washington D.C., and Europe

  2. #77
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    938
    Slightly OT to the OT, but its re: SSL

    Quote Originally Posted by IGobyTerry View Post
    Yes, it'll work with both our cloud hosting and cloud servers.

    The virtual hosts the article is talking about is a web server configuration tool used to eliminate the need for every website to have it's own IP address.
    This begs the question. Do you have a load balancer for the cloud hosting or is it just a simple dynamic IP on a single cloud VPS? If you have a load balancer, is there anything in place to deal with server affinity issues?

    I ask because some other providers (not to be mentioned) actually seem to shunt people off the main LBs/cluster and single box anyone who needs an SSL.

    Thanks

  3. #78
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    8,535
    Quote Originally Posted by tchen View Post
    Slightly OT to the OT, but its re: SSL



    This begs the question. Do you have a load balancer for the cloud hosting or is it just a simple dynamic IP on a single cloud VPS? If you have a load balancer, is there anything in place to deal with server affinity issues?

    I ask because some other providers (not to be mentioned) actually seem to shunt people off the main LBs/cluster and single box anyone who needs an SSL.

    Thanks
    No load balancer. We can do that, but not on a cloud hosting setup. Would require a customized solution through our cloud servers. Sorry for the short response - little busy this afternoon!

  4. #79
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    938
    No problem. That answers it fully. Thanks.

  5. #80
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    1,112
    BETA registration e-mail has been sent out (http://pastebin.com/nQYrPTh9).

    Unfortunately nothing special here, it does sound like they are now competing with every cPanel shared hosting provider utilizing their cloud servers...

    I've asked about that anyway (what makes VPS.net different to existing cPanel providers on their network?) plus asked for a sign up form to see if there is any more to this service.

    From the information given so far, it doesn't sound like a "Hey, hosting industry, wake up!" product, as they've put it... though I'm willing to be proved wrong once I have my hands on some login details and the possibility to perhaps move a website over temporarily (although cPanel is quite an annoying panel to use!!)

  6. #81
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    1,112
    From Twitter: "Just sent out the cloud hosting email - failed to mention you have both our custom control panel *and* cPanel...tweet us any other Q's. ^NN"

    Looking forward to see what this custom control panel is about!

  7. #82
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    263
    Does anyone know if each vps node is encrypted so all the data is encrypted and cannot be read by the vps.net staff?

  8. #83
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    1,112
    No idea, I kind of doubt that myself but only they will be able to tell you.

    If data is encrypted by VPS.NET, then surely they can unencrypt it themselves anyway. Why do you want to hide your data from then anyway? If you're using their cloud servers, i.e. not the product we're discussing in this topic, then can you not just encrypt the data on our node(s) yourself?

    I responded to the mass e-mail at 24 March 2011 11:18 as advised and have had no response... these people seem kinda lousy, not a good sign

  9. #84
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Kirkland, WA
    Posts
    4,448
    This is currently in testing internally. We found a few caveats that we want fixed before going into public beta. I would much rather launch this late and great, then throw it out there now.
    Nick Nelson
    Sr. Director & GM, VAS
    Demand Media
    425.298.2282 nn@demandmedia.com

  10. #85
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    8,535
    Quote Originally Posted by BlueHayes View Post
    No idea, I kind of doubt that myself but only they will be able to tell you.

    If data is encrypted by VPS.NET, then surely they can unencrypt it themselves anyway. Why do you want to hide your data from then anyway? If you're using their cloud servers, i.e. not the product we're discussing in this topic, then can you not just encrypt the data on our node(s) yourself?

    I responded to the mass e-mail at 24 March 2011 11:18 as advised and have had no response... these people seem kinda lousy, not a good sign
    name/email address? feel free to contact me at terry(at)vps.net. The management team personally handled the signups for the cloud hosting, however since it was done by a team of 3 people, a few emails may have slipped through the cracks, especially if a question was specifically addressed to a specific person.

    The data is not encrypted though. The account will look exactly like a traditional shared hosting account, only we've aimed to deliver better performance and uptime, regardless of traffic levels and CPU utilization.

  11. #86
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    554
    Seems like a fairly compelling product. While the usual marketing tricks are employed to sell to consumers what is essentially shared hosting built on better infrastructure than what was commonplace in the past, that kind of marketing works because savvy customers value being on that kind of infrastructure yet don't want to mess around with system administration in any capacity whatsoever.

    Most importantly of all, it's Europe/UK-based. There are any number of similar products in the US I'd probably have signed up for if the additional latency and decreased download speed didn't make being hosted outside of the UK a deal breaker for me.

  12. #87
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    554
    Just got set up with a beta account. A little disappointed that the only beta location is Atlanta which kind of defeats the point of what I said in my last post, but I've given it a quick spin with my usual stock WordPress installation that gives me a good real-world benchmark.

    Performance seems to be excellent at this point, with consistent page execution times of 0.060–0.100 seconds. With Apache shared hosting this is typically more like 0.250–0.400 in my experience — I haven't encountered performance like this on a shared host without Litespeed or Nginx being part of the equation.

    With that said the service is brand new and limited to 250 sign-ups, so performance is inevitably going to be fast right now. I have no idea how their system is structured but if they can maintain this performance I'll be impressed, and this will be what makes or breaks the reputation of this service IMO.

    For comparison my same stock WordPress installation fares at 0.150–0.450 seconds with EuroVPS's cloud hosting which is an extremely similar platform, 0.080–0.200 seconds on one of EZPZHosting's shared packages, and 0.040–0.060 seconds on a 512mb Linode VPS running Nginx.

    Other facts of interest are that the control panel seems to be an extremely stripped-down version of cPanel, and the pricing seems to be based primarily around 'visitors per month'. This is a fairly ambiguous metric that I'd like to know more about because there's a huge difference in server resources between 25k static content hits and 25k inefficient dynamic page hits, and I'd be pretty annoyed if I knew I was paying the same per hit as someone else who is thrashing VPS.net's resources in comparison — chances are lots of people with weighty sites will be attracted by the service and this will mean either prices will have to go up across the board or global performance will degrade (see Mosso/RackSpace Cloud Sites for reference).

    I'll be disappointed if they're using something as broad as server hits to gauge pricing, especially considering the price you pay to, say, serve 125k hits rather than 25k (the lowest plan).

    Pricing is here now by the way:

    http://www.vps.net/product/cloud-hosting
    Last edited by Ryan Williams; 05-10-2011 at 11:26 AM.

  13. #88
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    10,710
    Are they actually limiting you to a certain number of visitors? They list it as an average number of visitors, along with an actual data transfer limit. What if you receive more than the average number of visitors but haven't reached the data transfer limit?

  14. #89
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    554
    It's worded a little differently behind the scenes. In their introductory email:

    That'll get you 5GB of RAID10 fully redundant disk space, and enough CPU and RAM for 25,000 monthly visitors.
    And when choosing your account via the sign-up and in the control panel there isn't even a mention of bandwidth. The only displayed resources are disk space and 'traffic level' (25k on the lowest plan). This definitely implies the traffic limit is an actual resource they're tracking rather than merely a guideline.

    http://i55.tinypic.com/k32ger.jpg

  15. #90
    Quote Originally Posted by Ryan Williams View Post
    It's worded a little differently behind the scenes. In their introductory email:



    And when choosing your account via the sign-up and in the control panel there isn't even a mention of bandwidth. The only displayed resources are disk space and 'traffic level' (25k on the lowest plan). This definitely implies the traffic limit is an actual resource they're tracking rather than merely a guideline.

    http://i55.tinypic.com/k32ger.jpg
    wow - its so much easier and effective to track,limit and bill for CPU and RAM utilization. I would have concerns with this model. I mean one website uses x% of CPU and RAM to deliver 25k visitors and another website might use 10000x that many resources for the same amount of visitors. You are probably amplifying the issues with shared hosting with this model, not addressing them. I am probably misunderstanding something though - and I am sure this is just their first run through this and they will evolve the product into a more resource based model. makes sense if they are trying to use this as a stepping stone product for their VPS solutions

  16. #91
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    8,535
    Thanks for the feedback on the beta Ryan. It's great to see such a comprehensive write up already. We've been doing some private beta testing with a select number of customers for a bit, and have revised the product as necessary based off that. With this kind of information, we'll be able to continue to make overall improvements.

    As a note, we will have additional locations online soon. With the public beta just opening, and changes being made as necessary, we didn't want to overextend ourselves immediately.

    Once again, thanks for the great feedback from everyone!

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 7
    Last Post: 08-26-2011, 06:28 PM
  2. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-27-2010, 10:33 AM
  3. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 05-04-2010, 01:39 PM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-15-2010, 04:28 PM
  5. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-01-2010, 01:37 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •