Results 1 to 15 of 15
-
01-18-2008, 04:57 PM #1Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Feb 2005
- Location
- UK
- Posts
- 554
Mosso considering using page impressions as a basis for pricing
I'm sure many of us are familiar with Mosso, who affectionately call themselves 'The Hosting System'.
A Mosso staff member recently revealed that a number of plans are to be rolled out during 2008, including a new control panel and adjustments to the pricing model.
The most surprising change I saw was that Mosso realises some sites use up infinitely more server resources (not including disk space and bandwidth), and they're going to address this by giving all people a generous amount of resource usage that covers the majority of customers, and that can be bought in further allotments if needed.
Sounds very similar to Media Temple's GPU system, right? Right.
What's a little more surprising is that they're very much considering using page impressions as the measure, frequently known as 'hits'. Yes, that means every single file requested eats into your budget. Even worse, they're only aiming to cover about 80% of customers with their change, which means 20% of people will end up having to pay for impression overages.
This seems a bit mental to me. Any webmaster will tell you that the amount of impressions on a single page can be reduced from dozens to a few with some clever HTML/CSS optimisation, which for example could mean that each visitor only takes 3 impressions from your budget instead of 25. Soon adds up.
How can you possibly say that two identical blogs -- one of which has 50 smilies used throughout the posts on one page, and one with just one or two -- use the same resources? Yet this is the reality of using something as variable as impressions as a measure.
Looks like Mosso may very well shoot themselves squarely in the face with this because they seem serious about it. Am I being a bit critical here or does anyone else think this seems crazy?
Just getting this out there as I'm sure this will be interesting information for any current/future client of Mosso.0
-
01-18-2008, 05:53 PM #2Disabled
- Join Date
- Jul 2006
- Location
- Detroit, MI
- Posts
- 1,962
It seems to me that instead of innovating, some of these companies are scrambling to come up with something they can pass off as "new" or "better". What a farce..
Regards,0
-
01-18-2008, 07:06 PM #3Aspiring Evangelist
- Join Date
- Feb 2003
- Posts
- 410
There is actually some logic to it. More requests can result in greater CPU usage.
» OmegaSphere - http://www.omegasphere.net/
» Vancouver co-location, Managed Services, Shared Hosting, SSL Certificates, Domain Names
» Your IT Experts - Located in beautiful Vancouver, BC, Canada
» 604-618-0543 - 866-618-0543 - support@omegasphere.net0
-
01-18-2008, 07:09 PM #4Eternal Member
- Join Date
- Dec 2004
- Location
- New York, NY
- Posts
- 10,710
0
-
01-18-2008, 07:26 PM #5Disabled
- Join Date
- Jul 2006
- Location
- Detroit, MI
- Posts
- 1,962
0
-
01-19-2008, 12:27 AM #6Retired Moderator
- Join Date
- Oct 2002
- Location
- EU - east side
- Posts
- 21,920
I doubt that their aim is to CPU measure usage with 100% reliability, rather have some sort of guideline as to what may be too much for the $ one pays. A fuzzy logic algorithm using enough variables could turn out to be accurate enough, and serve the purpose.
Even worse, they're only aiming to cover about 80% of customers with their change, which means 20% of people will end up having to pay for impression overages.0
-
01-19-2008, 03:07 AM #7Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Apr 2006
- Posts
- 2,204
As there are different kinds of traffic that affects the server(s) differently, this "per pageview"-system is as blunt as using the transferred GB ratio-system.
0
-
01-19-2008, 05:19 PM #8Aspiring Evangelist
- Join Date
- Feb 2003
- Posts
- 410
» OmegaSphere - http://www.omegasphere.net/
» Vancouver co-location, Managed Services, Shared Hosting, SSL Certificates, Domain Names
» Your IT Experts - Located in beautiful Vancouver, BC, Canada
» 604-618-0543 - 866-618-0543 - support@omegasphere.net0
-
01-19-2008, 05:28 PM #9Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Aug 2004
- Location
- Canada
- Posts
- 3,785
They could maybe make it work if there was a weighing system based if there needed to be some sort of cgi being ran (php, perl ruby ect.)
So .php pages cost you more than say .html which would make some sense.█ Tony B. - Chief Executive Officer
█ Hawk Host Inc. Proudly serving websites since 2004
█ Quality Shared and Cloud Hosting
█ PHP 5.2.x - PHP 8.1.X Support!0
-
01-20-2008, 09:10 AM #10Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Apr 2006
- Posts
- 2,204
0
-
01-20-2008, 07:18 PM #11Junior Guru
- Join Date
- Aug 2004
- Posts
- 242
I'm going to show you that you can generate more CPU usage with less hits. Proof of concept:
1. Small CPU usage
- Static HTML page
- 5 style sheets
- 3 javascript files
- 70 small images (list of thumbnails and smileys)
2. Big CPU usage
- 1 Joomla-based PHP index file
- 1 style sheet
- 1 javascript file
- 1 CSS concatenation image file (concatenating tens of images)
0
-
01-20-2008, 07:21 PM #12Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Apr 2006
- Posts
- 2,204
@calande we are discussing methodology here, not the actual behavioural details of application-x
0
-
01-20-2008, 07:52 PM #13Eternal Member
- Join Date
- Dec 2004
- Location
- New York, NY
- Posts
- 10,710
0
-
01-20-2008, 07:58 PM #14…
- Join Date
- May 2007
- Posts
- 896
These behavioral details are essential to the methodology. In calende's example, #1 would be charged more than #2 even though #2 would consume more resources. That's grossly unfair.
The problem with this system that people can circumvent it easily through concatenations and optimizations that really don't reduce the server load or resource usage.0
-
01-20-2008, 08:06 PM #15Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Apr 2006
- Posts
- 2,204
You are taking on the problem of producing fair product specs and metrics from a technocratic point of view.
Which applications that uses what kinds of resources is not relevant to the issue of how to find a fair statistics tool that both clients and hosting providers can use to make good decisions.
However, resource allocations per application, usage-patterns etc is interesting and valid, but just not in this particular context which is metrics.0