Results 1 to 18 of 18
-
06-16-2002, 08:15 PM #1Junior Guru Wannabe
- Join Date
- Jun 2002
- Posts
- 41
why colocation seems more expensive than dedicated server
hi,
it seems to me that colocation is more expensive than dedicated server, which is unreasonable to me. Why?
let me see, RackShack.net $99/month for 400 gb bw, with server and software and management. Why can not anybody give me a colocation deal at $50/month with 400 gb bw?
If not, why?
thanks
charlie.
-
06-16-2002, 11:34 PM #2Newbie
- Join Date
- Jun 2002
- Location
- New Jersey
- Posts
- 28
Simple
No one wants to colo anymore places taht do are bursting at tehre seems with boxes and places like rack shack dont want to deal with shipping machines. Also if something were to happen to the machine and it was there fault they are liable... This is just what ive heard. Please dont flame me.
-
06-17-2002, 12:54 AM #3Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Dec 2001
- Location
- Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Posts
- 6,896
Re: why colocation seems more expensive than dedicated server
Originally posted by alyui8
hi,
it seems to me that colocation is more expensive than dedicated server, which is unreasonable to me. Why?
let me see, RackShack.net $99/month for 400 gb bw, with server and software and management. Why can not anybody give me a colocation deal at $50/month with 400 gb bw?
If not, why?
thanks
charlie.Myles Loosley-Millman - admin@prioritycolo.com
Priority Colo Inc. - Affordable Colocation & Dedicated Servers.
Two Canadian facilities serving Toronto & Markham, Ontario
http://www.prioritycolo.com
-
06-17-2002, 07:03 AM #4Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Aug 2001
- Location
- Matrix
- Posts
- 2,469
IMO, the companies who offer cheapo servers do not offer co-location and companies offering cheapo servers oversell servers but they can not oversell rack space.
just my $0.02CPHosting - Web Hosting Experts Since 1998.
United States | Europe | Singapore | Australia
Visit Us! www.cphosting.com
-
06-17-2002, 10:48 PM #5Junior Guru Wannabe
- Join Date
- Jun 2002
- Posts
- 41
but they will charge you much more for a better machine
but they charge you much more for a better machine, for the same size and bandwidth.
-
06-17-2002, 11:19 PM #6Aspiring Evangelist
- Join Date
- Apr 2002
- Location
- Chicago, Illinios
- Posts
- 391
Originally posted by mahinder
IMO, the companies who offer cheapo servers do not offer co-location and companies offering cheapo servers oversell servers but they can not oversell rack space.
just my $0.02
The key is to buy a lot of space. You can't get the best deal by buying 1U of space and some bandwidth. If you want to get space cheaply, get 1/2 rack or full rack. Then, ONLY pay for the bandwidth you use, and you can save far more in the long run than going with Rackshack.(that is, if you use the space in the full rack.)
-
06-17-2002, 11:25 PM #7Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Apr 2001
- Location
- St. Louis, MO
- Posts
- 2,508
And in colocation, you can pay for only the bandwidth you use(usually 512kbps, 1mbps, ect...), so even Rackshack would have to charge more than for what they do with their dedicated serversMike @ Xiolink.com
http://www.xiolink.com 1-877-4-XIOLINK
Advanced Managed Microsoft Hosting
"Your data... always within reach"
-
06-17-2002, 11:33 PM #8Aspiring Evangelist
- Join Date
- Apr 2002
- Location
- Chicago, Illinios
- Posts
- 391
Originally posted by RackMy.com
Well, not really. There are companies like efreeservers that do the same thing, they oversell BW.
-
06-18-2002, 03:04 AM #9Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Apr 2001
- Location
- St. Louis, MO
- Posts
- 2,508
EFreeservers.com does not offer colocation, it's Econtinents.comMike @ Xiolink.com
http://www.xiolink.com 1-877-4-XIOLINK
Advanced Managed Microsoft Hosting
"Your data... always within reach"
-
06-18-2002, 08:03 AM #10Aspiring Evangelist
- Join Date
- Apr 2002
- Location
- Chicago, Illinios
- Posts
- 391
Originally posted by RackMy.com
Same difference Check out their colo packages; Data Transfer: 1.5Mbps (500GB) - $300.00 (smallest package)
-
06-18-2002, 09:34 AM #11Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Dec 2001
- Posts
- 5,221
Greetings:
"let me see, RackShack.net $99/month for 400 gb bw, with server and software and management. Why can not anybody give me a colocation deal at $50/month with 400 gb bw?"
Rackshack.net has no performance SLA.
Rackshack.net has no hardware repair/replacement guarantee.
Rackshack.net has no uptime guarantee.
Rackshack.net is owned by Everyone's Internet, and it is probably E.I. that has excess bandwidth that Rashack.net gets cheaply or can buy cheaply because of the size of the combined operation.
And there's no guarantee that overselling is not taking place.
I guess what I'm getting at is that I would not use Rackshack.net as a benchmark for what can be done dedicated or co.
We do have a rackshack.net server, and are consider additional ones (the current one is basically for development work); so I'm not stating the above to bash them... just point out that they are not exactly a benchmark company for the purposes you point out.
Thank you.
-
06-18-2002, 11:52 AM #12Aspiring Evangelist
- Join Date
- Apr 2002
- Location
- Chicago, Illinios
- Posts
- 391
.
-
06-18-2002, 12:04 PM #13Web Hosting Guru
- Join Date
- Apr 2001
- Location
- Boston Metro
- Posts
- 345
Co-location is more expensive to provide than server leasing.
With co-location you end up with a room full of strange machines, all with different configurations,etc. And someone has to know how to reboot all of them, and what their quirks are. Plus, customers frequently need to visit their machines and do things to them.
With server leasing like Rackshack, you have nothing but your servers, set up to your configuration standards, and customers never need to enter your data center.http://forums.webhostdir.com/
All your hosts are belong to us
-
06-18-2002, 12:11 PM #14
Also to point out, one thing that was only breifly mentioned in the thread.
With dedicated servers you can easily oversell bandwidth, as only 5% or maybe 10% will use the full alotment of bandwidth.
However, with co-location, why am I going to go buy 400gb of bandwidth when I only need 50? I'm going to buy 50 and use 50.
So on co-location i'd say it'd be closer to 80% of the customers use their full or close to their full alotment that they purchase.KnownHost Managed Services Specialists
Fully Managed WebSite Hosting
Offering WordPress, Shared, Reseller, VPS, KVM, WordPress, Dedicated servers and more!
Contact us: sales@knownhost.com or by phone 1-866-332-9894
-
06-18-2002, 12:15 PM #15Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Dec 2001
- Location
- Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Posts
- 6,896
Dont forget the hassle of getting, and setting up every single server. You cant do anything in batches for colocation "ok Jim, we've been gathering servers in the mail for 2 weeks now, we'll run a batch, and your server will go up next week!". It just doesen't work . Colocation can be cheaper then dedicated if you do it right and if your needs are relatively moderate. Colo providers often bend a lot further over to do stuff, i mean we've given complete tours of the facility (people flying in from out of town at that) for our $95/mo package.... Go tell rackshack you're interested in buying a 99/mo server package but want a tour of the facilities first .
Myles Loosley-Millman - admin@prioritycolo.com
Priority Colo Inc. - Affordable Colocation & Dedicated Servers.
Two Canadian facilities serving Toronto & Markham, Ontario
http://www.prioritycolo.com
-
06-18-2002, 08:20 PM #16Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- May 2001
- Posts
- 682
As Daniel mentioned... the primary if not only reason colo is more expensive because people who colo their own servers have a purpose and need for that particular machine and they know exactly how much bandwidth they need or will be needing.
If everyone was to use all 400 gigs of bw at Rackshack in one month, it would bring them to their knees both in performance and in a big fat bandwidth bill. But they know most people don't use 400 gigs of bandwidth... it's just a marketing plan. But a person that wants to spend money on a machine to have colo'd some where will only buy what they will be using.. so overselling doens't work with colo.
-
06-18-2002, 09:13 PM #17Junior Guru Wannabe
- Join Date
- Mar 2002
- Posts
- 91
if RS had more customers like myself (pushing 2MB/s up to 6MB/s for the the last 24hours) they would collapse
-
06-19-2002, 01:12 AM #18Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Oct 2001
- Location
- Atlanta, GA
- Posts
- 564
From reading RS's forums it appears they are getting ready to offer colocation. I think the deal will probably be either $49 - $99 a month for 1u space and 300-500 or more gb bw.
-Jeff Jones
Nublar Cloud Hosting