Results 1 to 25 of 50
-
09-05-2002, 03:55 AM #1Newbie
- Join Date
- Sep 2002
- Posts
- 21
Is There Nothing Better Than Rackshack.net?????
ARE THESE GUYS SIMPLY THE BEST IN THE GAME? LOWEST PRICED FOR MOST FUNCITIONALITY?
www.WhoisDatabase.com
-
09-05-2002, 04:05 AM #2Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Nov 2001
- Posts
- 5,383
Re: Is There Nothing Better Than Rackshack.net?????
Originally posted by mjtint
ARE THESE GUYS SIMPLY THE BEST IN THE GAME? LOWEST PRICED FOR MOST FUNCITIONALITY?Clustered Hosting With Continuous Data Protection (CDP)
http://www.solidinternet.com
8 Years of hosting excellence!
-
09-05-2002, 04:22 AM #3Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- May 2001
- Location
- @ Work - Usually!
- Posts
- 835
Given the recent rackshak spam policy I would be worried about going with them for putting shared hosting customers on - might be good for single site servers though.
-
09-05-2002, 04:54 AM #4Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Sep 2000
- Posts
- 1,015
"Best" is as subjective as something like beauty. Obviously some people have had great experience with Rackshack, and some have not. It depends on your skill level with server admin and your luck I guess.
-
09-05-2002, 05:35 AM #5WHT Addict
- Join Date
- Aug 2002
- Location
- UK
- Posts
- 164
They are certainly one of the cheapest dedicated server hosts around. The best host will always depend on your own needs as GeorgeC pointed out.
dBforums.com - Database design, development and administration.
-
09-05-2002, 06:53 AM #6Newbie
- Join Date
- Jul 2002
- Location
- Clark, New Jersey
- Posts
- 6
>"Best" is as subjective as something like beauty. Obviously some people have had great experience with Rackshack, and some have not. It depends on your skill level with server admin and your luck I guess.<
Not anymore true for RS now, things have changed over there. As RS's growing bigger, customer's satisfaction is going lower. They don't care their customers anymore. My suggestion, avoid this host if you can, you won't regret that later like most did.
-
09-05-2002, 07:09 AM #7Registered User
- Join Date
- Jul 2002
- Posts
- 52
well, they are cheap but there are some cheap ones out there too like nocster or fastservers in terms of monthly.
do not be trapped by their cheap setup fee. but if for personal site, it is ok to go with them..
-
09-05-2002, 12:07 PM #8Newbie
- Join Date
- Sep 2002
- Posts
- 21
If RS is not the best and cheapest, then who is??
To Howard: I wetn to www.fastservers.net and they are more expensive. What were you talking about?www.WhoisDatabase.com
-
09-05-2002, 12:11 PM #9Junior Guru Wannabe
- Join Date
- Aug 2002
- Posts
- 86
www.fdcservers.net is about the same pricing as rackshack but their policies are better toward customers reguarding bandwith
hehe
-
09-05-2002, 12:12 PM #10Newbie
- Join Date
- Sep 2002
- Posts
- 21
What are so bad about RS policies?
www.WhoisDatabase.com
-
09-05-2002, 12:15 PM #11Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Sep 2001
- Location
- Clifton Park, NY
- Posts
- 925
You can't really have a 'best' for something that has multiple possible applications. They are definatly one of the most successful low priced dedicated server companies but generally the 'best' in quality isnt the 'best' in price and visa versa.
-Brendan
-
09-05-2002, 12:59 PM #12Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Dec 2001
- Location
- Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Posts
- 6,896
mjtint: How long is a piece of string?
It's the same as the question that you just asked, without more information, there is no definitive answer.Myles Loosley-Millman - admin@prioritycolo.com
Priority Colo Inc. - Affordable Colocation & Dedicated Servers.
Two Canadian facilities serving Toronto & Markham, Ontario
http://www.prioritycolo.com
-
09-05-2002, 01:46 PM #13Junior Guru Wannabe
- Join Date
- Dec 2001
- Location
- N.Ireland
- Posts
- 80
Rackshack's network certainly beats any other 99$ server networks alough some good companies run the odd special. There are several other companies around that offer a similar deal on pricing to.
Rackshack arn't realy as cheap as everyone thinks though I mean to add another harddrive costs a fair bit on top of which there 8% tax added in where as other companies you pay what they say on there site. Also most other companies can charge you a big setup on extra's and be more flexable rackshack on the other hand is not flexable in the slighest. Also most of rs's tech's don't realy much more than the words restore. There not the best in alot of area's but it realy depends on what you need.
-
09-05-2002, 02:49 PM #14Junior Guru Wannabe
- Join Date
- Aug 2002
- Posts
- 86
Originally posted by mjtint
What are so bad about RS policies?
Their bandwith monitor has been up and down for the past 2 years and has never given the customer an accurate reflection of what they say the users are using.
Many of their users installed bandwith monitors on their servers on their own and weighed their results against what RS said and found enormous inconsistencies. When these inconsistencies begin costing you or your business $1.50/gigabyte the sweat starts to mount.
If you are running a server with a 400 GB liimit and measure yourself to use for example (300 GB in a month) but rackshack's broken monitor says you used 800 GB, guess what bud, you will find a $600 charge for overages on your credit card!
You may or may not find out about it until you recieve an e-mail a day later stating you are over bandwith
More recently they accused practically all users on their network of outrageous overages due to an error causing widespread panic and never sent out e-mails explaining the situation. I just about SHIOT my pants when i read "Your current bandwidth for your server is at 6752 gigabytes of transfer.
The maximum for your account is 400 gigabytes." They posted an explanation on their webboard and thats about it (but how many of their users bother to read their web board?) An email would have been nice.
I just think they should not charge overages until they impliment a successfully tested monitoring system tested in their environment and even then, No self respecting business goes and automatically charges a client $1000 on a credit card without consulting them first.
just read these forums and you will find over 200 stories like this (if they haven't been erased yet)
hehe
btw,
RS owns these forums now so expect a little bias in their favor from the posts that remain
-
09-05-2002, 03:55 PM #15WHT Addict
- Join Date
- Mar 2002
- Location
- MD
- Posts
- 114
If you don't mind shelling out an extra $36 on top of $99 a month for a dedicated server, I think www.fastservers.net is the best route.
-
09-05-2002, 04:25 PM #16Junior Guru Wannabe
- Join Date
- Aug 2002
- Posts
- 86
Originally posted by xelA
If you don't mind shelling out an extra $36 on top of $99 a month for a dedicated server, I think www.fastservers.net is the best route.
at a maximum offering of only 300GB/month fastservers doesn't seem like a route at all for some of us
-
09-05-2002, 04:26 PM #17Newbie
- Join Date
- Sep 2002
- Posts
- 21
exactly, so what is the best route to take?
www.WhoisDatabase.com
-
09-05-2002, 04:30 PM #18Junior Guru Wannabe
- Join Date
- Aug 2002
- Posts
- 86
well what is your plan for your server?
what do you plan to do?
host?
serve media/files?
serve plain http pages?
how many users do you have?
how much bandwith would you need in a month?
what kind of processes would you be running on your server?
do you need support or are you a unix/apache guru?
what kind of speed do you need?
you need to factor in all sorts of things
-
09-05-2002, 04:32 PM #19Newbie
- Join Date
- Sep 2002
- Posts
- 21
I'm going to be needing as much as bandwith I can get, over 300GB is for sure. I'll be hosting multiple domains.
www.WhoisDatabase.com
-
09-05-2002, 04:33 PM #20Junior Guru Wannabe
- Join Date
- Aug 2002
- Posts
- 86
ok but what do you intend to do with the bandwith?
-
09-05-2002, 04:33 PM #21Newbie
- Join Date
- Sep 2002
- Posts
- 21
Another question, what is the difference bettween managed servers and non managed? What do they do for you? Is it the way to go?
www.WhoisDatabase.com
-
09-05-2002, 04:34 PM #22Newbie
- Join Date
- Sep 2002
- Posts
- 21
I do not have a bandwith limit, as much as I can get for the cheapest, hopefully lower than 95 bucks a year.
www.WhoisDatabase.com
-
09-05-2002, 04:40 PM #23Junior Guru Wannabe
- Join Date
- Aug 2002
- Posts
- 86
Originally posted by mjtint
I do not have a bandwith limit, as much as I can get for the cheapest, hopefully lower than 95 bucks a year.
LOL
that wont get you squat
count on paying at least $99/month for any basic bare bones server and bandwith
unmanaged = do it yourself set up, installs, etc.
they give you access to a machine from a DOS prompt
thats all you get. If your hardware fails, you usually get to complain about that. but thats it!
managed = they do it for you, costs more but anything you ask for is done. webserver install, configurations, etc.
-
09-05-2002, 04:44 PM #24Newbie
- Join Date
- Sep 2002
- Posts
- 21
so with managed they even set up customer/new domain name accounts for you for free?
www.WhoisDatabase.com
-
09-05-2002, 04:45 PM #25Junior Guru Wannabe
- Join Date
- Aug 2002
- Posts
- 86
Originally posted by mjtint
so with managed they even set up customer/new domain name accounts for you for free?
depends who you go with
but expect to pay upwards of $150/month for a service like that with any type of bandwith