Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 40 of 74
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    65

    VPSHive by Gigenet has Launched

    Here is the announcement email:

    Hello,

    We want to say "thank you" to all of you helping us to bring VPSHive to this level.

    As of noon today, VPSHive is available to the general public - we have gone LIVE!

    Beginning Monday, January 25th, you will be able to convert your accounts from your Beta account to a Regular VPShive account.

    You will receive a separate e-mail about the sign up and conversion on Monday January 25th.

    Again, thanks to all of you for your participation in our beta program.

    Thanks,
    VPSHive Team
    http://www.vpshive.com/

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Manila
    Posts
    958
    and its expensive. You have to pay for 512MB Ram/200GB Bandwidth/20GB SPace for $45/month.

    It's like paying for a Wiredtree/ServInt VPS already.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    393
    Quote Originally Posted by flyah View Post
    and its expensive. You have to pay for 512MB Ram/200GB Bandwidth/20GB SPace for $45/month.

    It's like paying for a Wiredtree/ServInt VPS already.
    I agree. You could get a managed vps w/ more bandwidth (+ control panel) from ServInt.

    I have been playing around with the VPShive beta. The performance has been great... along with the network. But, while fair, the pricing isn't exactly inspiring. Actually, the specs/pricing is almost identical to slicehost.

    However, the cpu power appears to be better w/ VPShive vs. slicehost.
    Last edited by mainpipe; 01-22-2010 at 08:22 PM.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Manila
    Posts
    958
    Quote Originally Posted by mainpipe View Post
    I agree. You could get a managed vps w/ more bandwidth (+ control panel) from ServInt.

    I have been playing around with the VPShive beta. The performance has been great... along with the network. But, while fair, the pricing isn't exactly inspiring. Actually, the specs/pricing is almost identical to slicehost.

    However, the cpu power appears to be better w/ VPShive vs. slicehost.
    Well, even if the port speed is 1GBPS, I think they should have given at least 500gb minimum on their $45 Plan. Servercomplete offers 1024MB/40GB Space/450gg Bandwidth/ Xen for the same price of $45 and they have 100% uptime as well.


    Btw, I like VPShive's panel. The speed is decent here in Asia and the vps is stable. But their pricing is way too high!

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Posts
    6
    There is a grammar error on your homepage:

    White label Control panel for reseller's and there clients
    should read
    White label Control panel for resellers and their clients

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1,025
    there are lots of good reviews for the vpshive from beta tester, $45 is more expensive than I espected

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Croatia
    Posts
    141
    I tested it briefly - it was nice but for that pricing you can get managed services with similar or better specs at top VPS providers so passing on this one.
    I am a leaf on the wind. Watch how I soar.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Montreal, Canada
    Posts
    221
    I actually think you guys overpriced your services on this one.
    Thats too bad.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Pflugerville, TX
    Posts
    11,222
    It's unfortunate that it is so difficult to quantify the value of reliability and service, because given all of our experience with Gigenet, $45 seems like a very reasonable price to pay for a decent VPS plan with a company that manages their affairs and their clients so well.

    Is it really just a numbers game to you all? Is the entire value of a purchase located in the hardware, or do you suppose there's something more to that pricing? Think about it, because a host that treats its customers as well as Gigenet and is so committed to a solid infrastructure should not be subjected to quibbles over a few bucks here or there. You come to appreciate the value of something when you discover part of the reason you are successful is because your upstream providers give you a successful hosting environment.

    If you want to bash a company over a $45 price tag, you'd better have more to say about them than "512MB Ram/200GB Bandwidth/20GB SPace." So much isn't being told when you boil them down to mere numbers like this.

  10. #10
    Yes, it pains me when people simply say, I can get something similar for cheaper. People, you can ALWAYS get something cheaper. So what? That fact, since it is ALWAYS true, simply has no real bearing on the situation.

    Heck, if I switched hosts every time a cheaper one came along, I would have been kicked off WHT LONG ago
    CapeWP.com
    CapeWP.com - WordPress for all of us

  11. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by the_pm View Post
    It's unfortunate that it is so difficult to quantify the value of reliability and service, because given all of our experience with Gigenet, $45 seems like a very reasonable price to pay for a decent VPS plan with a company that manages their affairs and their clients so well.

    Is it really just a numbers game to you all? Is the entire value of a purchase located in the hardware, or do you suppose there's something more to that pricing? Think about it, because a host that treats its customers as well as Gigenet and is so committed to a solid infrastructure should not be subjected to quibbles over a few bucks here or there. You come to appreciate the value of something when you discover part of the reason you are successful is because your upstream providers give you a successful hosting environment.

    If you want to bash a company over a $45 price tag, you'd better have more to say about them than "512MB Ram/200GB Bandwidth/20GB SPace." So much isn't being told when you boil them down to mere numbers like this.
    Excellent post. 'Numbers' rarely tell the whole story -- or even part of it! And that's true not just for hosting, but throughout society (cars, computers, stereos, and even property). Ultimately the value of something is reflected by the amount someone is prepared to pay for something.. and I suspect many will be quite satisfied with Gigenet's offerings! There are many English idioms that touch on this subject, and sadly all too many posts on WHT that reflect it.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    393
    Quote Originally Posted by the_pm View Post
    It's unfortunate that it is so difficult to quantify the value of reliability and service, because given all of our experience with Gigenet, $45 seems like a very reasonable price to pay for a decent VPS plan with a company that manages their affairs and their clients so well.

    If you want to bash a company over a $45 price tag, you'd better have more to say about them than "512MB Ram/200GB Bandwidth/20GB Space." So much isn't being told when you boil them down to mere numbers like this.
    All very valid points. But speaking for myself, I was anticipating more of a "WOW" factor when VPShive went live. When I saw the final website & packages, I was simply underwhelmed. Don't get me wrong, the core vps product is robust and worth the money. I have nothing bad to say about the network, the hardware, or their xen setup.

    AGAIN: the core vps product is robust and worth the money!

    But primarily, its the specs & the marketing that sell the product. The specs are basically the same as everywhere else. I was expecting to see at least more Ram, HD space, or bandwidth than the 'other guys'. In the end, we got exactly the same or a little less. I thought that since they own/control the datacenter (hardware, network, etc.) that they would be able to provide more.

    In my opinion, now they have to sell themselves as to why they are better.

    And I don't think they have done a good enough job differentiating themselves from the competition. They need to tell us and show us how their hardware is better, the network is better, and how they will support it all better. I haven't seen that yet. So until then, we can only compare the "512MB Ram/200GB Bandwidth/20GB Space".

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    52
    2Gb/80gb/800gb..
    for 140/month?
    nty

  14. #14
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Pflugerville, TX
    Posts
    11,222
    Quote Originally Posted by mainpipe View Post
    All very valid points. But speaking for myself, I was anticipating more of a "WOW" factor when VPShive went live. When I saw the final website & packages, I was simply underwhelmed. Don't get me wrong, the core vps product is robust and worth the money. I have nothing bad to say about the network, the hardware, or their xen setup.

    AGAIN: the core vps product is robust and worth the money!

    But primarily, its the specs & the marketing that sell the product. The specs are basically the same as everywhere else. I was expecting to see at least more Ram, HD space, or bandwidth than the 'other guys'. In the end, we got exactly the same or a little less. I thought that since they own/control the datacenter (hardware, network, etc.) that they would be able to provide more.

    In my opinion, now they have to sell themselves as to why they are better.

    And I don't think they have done a good enough job differentiating themselves from the competition. They need to tell us and show us how their hardware is better, the network is better, and how they will support it all better. I haven't seen that yet. So until then, we can only compare the "512MB Ram/200GB Bandwidth/20GB Space".
    Presumably, you received this email because you participated in the VPSHive beta, is that correct? If so, then you have much more to say than others, because everyone else is debating from a very uninformed position.

    How stable has the environment been? How has their support been? Have transfer speeds been good for you? As a dedicated customer, I've found them to be outstanding on all counts, which greatly increases the value of the hardware/stats they're selling. It seems you agree with this position.

    A company doesn't differentiate itself by how well it markets itself. A company differentiates itself by how well it lives up to its promises and the expectations of its customers. Have they met your expectations? Are they worth their price to you? You are in a unique position to assess this that others in this thread are not, unless they have experience with Gigenet and simply haven't mentioned it. Anyone else who calls it "too expensive" without the benefit of first-hand experience is basing that decision on much too little information, or is revealing their sole buying criteria. I thought, as professionals in the industry, or at least as better-informed hosters, that we would be beyond this mentality.
    Last edited by the_pm; 01-23-2010 at 07:33 PM.

  15. #15
    the_pm they didn't flame gigenet, but realisticly stated that they can get same or even more with others ALSO reputable, stable, well known VPS providers.
    Yes, they might be outstanding on all counts but what's wrong if people say that there around are also others outstanding on all counts fully managed VPS providers which offer more for this price. Relax please.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Pflugerville, TX
    Posts
    11,222
    Quote Originally Posted by testnick View Post
    the_pm they didn't flame gigenet, but realisticly stated that they can get same or even more with others ALSO reputable, stable, well known VPS providers.
    Yes, they might be outstanding on all counts but what's wrong if people say that there around are also others outstanding on all counts fully managed VPS providers which offer more for this price. Relax please.
    Oh, I have no problem with price comparisons! Some of the comments here just underly and perpetuate a more pervasive problem within the industry, that the value of a host is too often based on stats alone. It's sends a bad message to the general public, that's all.

    I've said my piece and hopefully made my point. Some people said $45 for Gigenet's product is "too expensive." I made a counterpoint that $45 is quite good when you take a larger picture into account.

    Relax

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Manila
    Posts
    958
    Quote Originally Posted by the_pm View Post
    Oh, I have no problem with price comparisons! Some of the comments here just underly and perpetuate a more pervasive problem within the industry, that the value of a host is too often based on stats alone. It's sends a bad message to the general public, that's all.

    I've said my piece and hopefully made my point. Some people said $45 for Gigenet's product is "too expensive." I made a counterpoint that $45 is quite good when you take a larger picture into account.

    Relax
    Yes, Gigenet is a great company, but still as a customer, why would I pay $45 for 200GB bandwidth whereas I can get 1000GB of it from Servint and Wiredtree's $49 "Fully Manged", with "Cpanel", VPS?

    Alright, Let's take it into consideration that Gigenet is a very reputable company. They are the Best in the Dedicated Hosting Business, but money-wise, would you pay your hard earned cash of $45 just for a 200 GB Bandwidth? I would say, no Thank You.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Pflugerville, TX
    Posts
    11,222
    Quote Originally Posted by flyah View Post
    Yes, Gigenet is a great company, but still as a customer, why would I pay $45 for 200GB bandwidth whereas I can get 1000GB of it from Servint and Wiredtree's $49 "Fully Manged", with "Cpanel", VPS?

    Alright, Let's take it into consideration that Gigenet is a very reputable company. They are the Best in the Dedicated Hosting Business, but money-wise, would you pay your hard earned cash of $45 just for a 200 GB Bandwidth? I would say, no Thank You.
    All things being equal, no, I wouldn't. But rarely, if ever, are all things equal. For example (not related to VPSHive, just a random example), I'll pay twice as much for a VPS if the uptime is 99.99% rather than 99.9%. As one of my very good friends Vito often says, "I'm not rich enough to afford to buy cheap things."

    If your experience with these companies leads you to believe the difference is not worthwhile pricewise, that is a much more complete statement than many previously posted in this thread! Your original post/comparison was a good one - well informed. Some others...not so much...

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    46
    Quote Originally Posted by the_pm View Post
    If your experience with these companies leads you to believe the difference is not worthwhile pricewise, that is a much more complete statement than many previously posted in this thread! Your original post/comparison was a good one - well informed. Some others...not so much...
    You don't have to constantly insult "some others" to make your point. There are different people with different needs. Some people have tight budget and they don't need a premium VPS, and it's completely OK for them to say it's too expensive FOR THEM.

    I believe you that VPShive is probably a very good VPS provider (btw, I'm a beta tester too in case you want to say i'm not informed too). But you can't just charge whatever premium you think you deserve, you have to consider what your target customers think. VPShive's offering is nice, their hardware is very good, although the unixbench score isn't very impressive. The admin interface has potential but for now still not very polished and needs more work. $45 is probably not too bad, but definitely on the expensive side, considering it's just unmanaged VPS. I agree that you can't just look at the stats and say it's overpriced. But as some of other people have pointed out, there are many other very reputable VPS companies who offer fully managed VPS at the same price, now I would say this at least is a good indicator that it may be overpriced a little bit. Again, VPShive may have very different target customers in mind, and I believe there will be people who won't mind this price. I guess my point is, you need to care about what your customers think, even if you provide perfect services, if majority of your customers think the price is not right, then you better do something (slicehost comes into mind....)

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    7,391
    Very nice design
    █• CirtexHosting Providing Affordable and Quality Web Hosting & Reseller Hosting since 2003
    █• LINUX based cPANEL/WHM Shared and Reseller Web Hosting with Fantastico
    █• HostV VPS Premium Virtual Private Servers & Dedicated Servers powered by cPanel/WHM
    █• We transfer your sites over quickly! I eat penguins for breakfast ...

  21. #21
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Pflugerville, TX
    Posts
    11,222
    Quote Originally Posted by novocaine View Post
    There are different people with different needs. Some people have tight budget and they don't need a premium VPS, and it's completely OK for them to say it's too expensive FOR THEM.
    Point taken, and my purpose wasn't to insult anyone. Let's just say I appreciate those who have taken the time to qualify their position, rather than stating positions with no context whatsoever. We can only work with what we're given, and in too many cases this is no more than "it's too much," without any insight into why or from what perspective this statement is being made. The discussions we have on WHT aren't just for the benefit of members - they're for the public, and I'm just asking people to think about how they portray their position, because it's indicative of how people think within the industry and how hosting customers should formulate opinions of providers.

    "This does/doesn't meet my needs, and here's why..." <-- there's a great posting template for discussions such as these

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    1,270
    Quote Originally Posted by flyah View Post
    Yes, Gigenet is a great company, but still as a customer, why would I pay $45 for 200GB bandwidth whereas I can get 1000GB of it from Servint and Wiredtree's $49 "Fully Manged", with "Cpanel", VPS?

    Alright, Let's take it into consideration that Gigenet is a very reputable company. They are the Best in the Dedicated Hosting Business, but money-wise, would you pay your hard earned cash of $45 just for a 200 GB Bandwidth? I would say, no Thank You.
    I would have to agree. Both Servint and Wiredtree are solid companies. I have never used gigenet and can't comment on their services. But I just can't imagine paying $45 for a VPS with those specs. I currently host at Linode and couldn't be any happier.

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    2,320
    I think VPSHive is out to compete with rackspace and liquid web's cloud hosting which pretty much at the same price range if you include the bandwidth cost.
    QuickWeb™ -We Host Servers Like a Boss!
    New Zealand - USA - UK - Germany Virtual Servers
    Worldwide hosting provider with proven 24x7 and 25-Minute Support!
    www.quickweb.co.nz and GETVZ - Complete VPS Package with SSD Drive

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Arlington Hts IL
    Posts
    15
    Part of our offer and expansion is DDoS offering, IDS and Anitvirus Anitspam solution. It is also in our Data Center with full server access - since that was one question i diid see come up in the VPS forum.

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    528
    Quote Originally Posted by fabrini View Post
    There is a grammar error on your homepage:

    White label Control panel for reseller's and there clients
    should read
    White label Control panel for resellers and their clients
    Agreed. Looks like they wrote it a bit too quickly. Access is also spelled wrong on the front page. However grammar errors are irrelevant to the host itself. I think its a great product. Thumbs up on the design.

  26. #26
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Scotland, UK
    Posts
    2,900
    Quote Originally Posted by the_pm View Post
    It's unfortunate that it is so difficult to quantify the value of reliability and service, because given all of our experience with Gigenet, $45 seems like a very reasonable price to pay for a decent VPS plan with a company that manages their affairs and their clients so well.

    Is it really just a numbers game to you all? Is the entire value of a purchase located in the hardware, or do you suppose there's something more to that pricing? Think about it, because a host that treats its customers as well as Gigenet and is so committed to a solid infrastructure should not be subjected to quibbles over a few bucks here or there. You come to appreciate the value of something when you discover part of the reason you are successful is because your upstream providers give you a successful hosting environment.

    If you want to bash a company over a $45 price tag, you'd better have more to say about them than "512MB Ram/200GB Bandwidth/20GB SPace." So much isn't being told when you boil them down to mere numbers like this.
    ServInt (http://www.servint.net/vps.php):
    Essential VPS

    30 GB Disk Space (vs 20GB)
    1 TB Monthly Transfer (vs 200GB)
    768 MB Guaranteed (1.5 GB Burst RAM) (Vs 512mb)

    CentOS 5 Operating System
    4 IP Addresses (Vs 1)
    Unlimited Domains and User Accounts
    FREE Virtuozzo Power Panel
    FREE nightly backups
    FREE cPanel, Plesk, or Parallels Small Business Panel Available (add $15 for cPanel at VPSHive)
    No set-up fee
    $49 monthly (vs $45, or $64 after you add cPanel + more than 1 IP)
    While I have no need for a VPS right now, I did use ServInt a number of years ago. I know they have a high quality operation, support was always very helpful, and I don't recall seeing anything on WHT to indicate that's changed too much.

    GigeNet / VPSHive are pretty late to the VPS party. There are plenty of established non-budget VPS providers out there who have proved over a number of years that they offer a very stable, sustainable and good value service.

    I know what I'm going to get with ServInt - everything you said is something I know I'd get from ServInt. If I'm going to take a risk on a new provider, then the numbers have got to stack up. There has to be an incentive for me to drop (or in this case, not return to) a provider I'm familiar with and would be very happy with, for one that I've never had any experience with. Especially when they want me to pay more money for less.

    Maybe that's because the VPSHive control panel is the best thing since sliced bread, and that as it doesn't matter to me I'm not their target customer. But still, numbers are very important - especially if someone knows they can get the level of service they need at a better price.
    Alasdair

  27. #27
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Pflugerville, TX
    Posts
    11,222
    Awesome summary of your position Alasdair

  28. #28
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Cheltenham, UK
    Posts
    1,323
    Just wanted to give a quick opinion/review of their services as we've seen it.

    We got accepted as a beta participant on 28th November 2009, so have had a good time period over which to review their service.

    During this time period, obviously they were working on upgrading/tweaking/finalizing everything. Our experience with them however was very good, uptime was solid (and they warned you in advance if they were taking VPS offline etc.) and the VPS templates were well put together.

    The control panel they put together is very well designed, you get console access to VPS (Linux) and remote desktop (Windows) via the control panel interface, can set rDNS, reboot, start, add new VPS, and so on - all in one easy to use interface.

    Honestly, I see no reason why they should not be successful upon the official launch of the service tomorrow.

    Having said all that:

    - Would we recommend using them anyone looking for a cloud provider: Yes, they seem to have a solid infustructure, the service seems to be well thought out, and they're backed by a well known reliable provider.

    - Will we be using them? No, simply because we have no real need for cloud hosting right now and are happy with the VPS that we currently have.
    And $800/month for 16GB RAM, 640GB storage and 2TB bandwidth? We could simply rent 10 dedicated servers across multiple locations with better specifications (Core i7, 8GB RAM, 2x1TB HDD, 3TB Bandwidth/server) for less and cluster them ourselves.
    Last edited by BTCentral - Ben; 01-24-2010 at 12:45 PM.
    Ben Thomas, Director - BTCentral Web Development Services
    http://www.btcentral.org.uk - Need a custom Web App? Visit us online.

  29. #29
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1,025
    same price for windows , linux?

    • Choice of operating systems Windows And Linux

    people who needs a windows vps may find it cheaper than one needs a linux vps

  30. #30
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Cheltenham, UK
    Posts
    1,323
    Quote Originally Posted by linuxclark View Post
    same price for windows , linux?
    No.

    Linux without cPanel is free.
    Linux with cPanel is $15/month.

    Windows Server 2003 Web or Standard Edition is $20.00/month.
    Windows Server 2003 Enterprise R2 32-bit is $50.00/month.

    All this information is readily available on their website.
    Ben Thomas, Director - BTCentral Web Development Services
    http://www.btcentral.org.uk - Need a custom Web App? Visit us online.

  31. #31
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1,025
    Ok, I see.

    I did check out their web site, but missed
    Windows Server 2003 Web or Standard Edition is $20.00/month.(at the very end of the windows order page), I thought windows was free.

  32. #32
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    106
    We have been beta testing this product for the past few months now, and are very happy with the results. Panel is quick and effective, orders are processed fast and clean. Hardware and network are extremely quick and responsive. Great job to the guys over there for listening to the beta testers and building the product around what the people here are looking for.
    Adam Piatek - CTO Ritmo Technology Group
    Dedicated Servers, Web Hosting Solutions Ventrilo Servers
    adam (at) ritmohost (dot) com

  33. #33
    Quote Originally Posted by tickedon View Post
    ServInt (http://www.servint.net/vps.php


    GigeNet / VPSHive are pretty late to the VPS party. There are plenty of established non-budget VPS providers out there who have proved over a number of years that they offer a very stable, sustainable and good value service.
    Well, to be fair, you are not comparing apples to apples..

    Being "late" to the "VPS party"?

    VPSHive is not the same product as a standard VPS offering. Forget the fact the ServINT is running software level virtuozzo virtualization (which is debatable at best to be equivalent to solutions like XEN or VMWare) - but, putting that aside for a minute.. these local host node VM solutions lack elasticity and certainly lack hardware level redundancy and fluidity..

    these are not the same solutions, not even close..

    the more accurate statement would be that legacy VPS solutions are behind in the VPS party - heck, they arent even playing in the same game..

    I know what I'm going to get with ServInt - everything you said is something I know I'd get from ServInt. If I'm going to take a risk on a new provider, then the numbers have got to stack up. There has to be an incentive for me to drop (or in this case, not return to) a provider I'm familiar with and would be very happy with, for one that I've never had any experience with. Especially when they want me to pay more money for less.
    If you are price conscious and do not see or require the advantages of the higher end solution - then you are correct, you should stick with what works for you. But, the incentive to move to such an offering is not price - the incentive is the technological advantages of one offering over another - and those advantages are not insignificant..

    Maybe that's because the VPSHive control panel is the best thing since sliced bread, and that as it doesn't matter to me I'm not their target customer. But still, numbers are very important - especially if someone knows they can get the level of service they need at a better price.
    the control panel has little to do with it. I know people like fancy control panels, etc.. those will come, over time.. the key thing here, that most seem to have missed in this thread is that you are not buying a standard local host node VPS model with software level virtualization. Heck, you arent even buying anything close to slicehost or rackspacecloud offerings (which at least represents legitimately isolated virtualization technology with Xen I believe - but, is still a local host storage model lacking legitimate hardware redundancy and scalability).. you are buying something closer to the amazon cloud offering...

    I understand peoples concern on price.. but, at the very least, people should understand what it is they are comparing price to.. and comparing a solution like this to legacy single server VPS technology is not appropriate - we are not even close to speaking apples to apples..

    Now, whether or not this VPShive offering will end up actually delivering value, I am honestly not sure.. I guess we will not know this for quite some time.. but, their pricing is certainly not out of line with what they are offering.. the costs to run and maintain such a solution are significantly greater then loading up virtuozzo on a beefy single host node and ramming accounts onto it..

    I hate coming to the defense of a direct competitor, I really do - but, honestly, people are not being overly reasonable here..

  34. #34
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    1,915
    Quote Originally Posted by cartika-andrew View Post
    Well, to be fair, you are not comparing apples to apples..

    Being "late" to the "VPS party"?

    VPSHive is not the same product as a standard VPS offering. Forget the fact the ServINT is running software level virtuozzo virtualization (which is debatable at best to be equivalent to solutions like XEN or VMWare) - but, putting that aside for a minute.. these local host node VM solutions lack elasticity and certainly lack hardware level redundancy and fluidity..

    these are not the same solutions, not even close..

    the more accurate statement would be that legacy VPS solutions are behind in the VPS party - heck, they arent even playing in the same game..



    If you are price conscious and do not see or require the advantages of the higher end solution - then you are correct, you should stick with what works for you. But, the incentive to move to such an offering is not price - the incentive is the technological advantages of one offering over another - and those advantages are not insignificant..



    the control panel has little to do with it. I know people like fancy control panels, etc.. those will come, over time.. the key thing here, that most seem to have missed in this thread is that you are not buying a standard local host node VPS model with software level virtualization. Heck, you arent even buying anything close to slicehost or rackspacecloud offerings (which at least represents legitimately isolated virtualization technology with Xen I believe - but, is still a local host storage model lacking legitimate hardware redundancy and scalability).. you are buying something closer to the amazon cloud offering...

    I understand peoples concern on price.. but, at the very least, people should understand what it is they are comparing price to.. and comparing a solution like this to legacy single server VPS technology is not appropriate - we are not even close to speaking apples to apples..

    Now, whether or not this VPShive offering will end up actually delivering value, I am honestly not sure.. I guess we will not know this for quite some time.. but, their pricing is certainly not out of line with what they are offering.. the costs to run and maintain such a solution are significantly greater then loading up virtuozzo on a beefy single host node and ramming accounts onto it..

    I hate coming to the defense of a direct competitor, I really do - but, honestly, people are not being overly reasonable here..
    I kept saying the same thing about not comparing apples to apples but didn't get around to posting yet. So I 100% agree. I wouldn't say though it's a superior product though due to it's nature of being a cloud like product as companies like Servint have mastered VPS's so in a few years maybe VPShive can be in the same group of reputable VPS providers. Gigenet is a different story as new ventures don't always reflect the same as the parent company. Personally speaking on the lower end VPS's with the cloud like approach (1 dedicated CPU approach for example) a Virtuozzo VPS will outperform it if your with the right host. Being limited to 1 CPU will not perform as well as a Virtuozzo VPS where Equal Share is configured properly. Sure as you pay more (higher end VPS's with the cloud approach) things may differ but at that point the prices aren't all that similar.
    Last edited by KnownHost; 01-24-2010 at 04:25 PM.

  35. #35
    Quote Originally Posted by KnownHost View Post
    I kept saying the same thing about not comparing apples to apples but didn't get around to posting yet. So I 100% agree. I wouldn't say though it's a superior product though due to it's nature of being a cloud like product as companies like Servint have mastered VPS's so in a few years maybe VPShive can be in the same group of reputable VPS providers. Gigenet is a different story as new ventures don't always reflect the same as the parent company. Personally speaking on the lower end VPS's with the cloud like approach (1 dedicated CPU approach for example) a Virtuozzo VPS will outperform it if your with the right host. Being limited to 1 CPU will not perform as well as a Virtuozzo VPS where Equal Share is configured properly. Sure as you pay more (higher end VPS's with the cloud approach) things may differ but at that point the prices aren't all that similar.
    Nice comments Knownhost...

    However, just to be fair, the alternate perspective would be as follows..

    - I really have not seen any recent data that would validate virtuozzo would perform better vs something like Xen, all things being equal.
    - Your comment however on the "right" provider is valid and I could see situations where a user on a shared CPU and RAM model would have more resources available to them, and for less money - as in a Xen server for example, you are locked and committed to resources (ie 1 CPU, 2 GB RAM) - and in certain situations, Virtuozzo types of models will allow customers to burst above their allocations - however, in these situations, users are bound and at the mercy of their provider to handle their allocations properly - and even then, the unforseen may happen and several customers sharing the resources may simultaneously and unexpectedly burst, thus leaving users with less resources ultimately. The flip side of your comments is that with guaranteed resources, you know exactly what you have, and you can buy more whenever you want. Additionally, if you are not in a real cloud environment, and if the node you happen to be on does not have enough resources available when you need to upgrade, what then? with a cloud solution, you will seamlessly get allocated to a node which has the available resources you are trying to purchase
    - with a local host model, what happens when the node you are hosting on goes down? raid failure? CPU or ram failure, or even power failure? a properly built cloud would be able to accommodate such scenarios without an outage, as instances would just be brought up on different host nodes. Even power failures at the DC level can be accommodated as, if built properly, providers will build out with A+B feeds, so that even if 1 power feed in a data center is affected, nodes can be brought up on alternate nodes on alternate power feeds...
    - Lastly, I do not agree with the fear approach. ie local vm host nodes are proven and the cloud approach is new therefore high risk.. we have been hosting customers on our cloud for quite awhile (have not released publicly yet) - and there are zero disadvantages over the local host model we have been publicly selling for quite some time. Fact is, local host node model presents all sorts of challenges that are absolved in the cloud model and the benefits should not be negated.. however, there is an additional cost to the consumer and the provide to address these challenges.. the truth of the matter though is, many customers do not require those advantages and certainly do not want or need to pay the premium for those advangates. If they have a node fail and are down for 15 mins here or there or a few hours every now and then to restore data - its not a big deal compared to the money they are saving.. but, to the customers that simply cannot afford to have a component fail take a site down, or who need to know that 8 cores and 16GB of ram will be available, seamlessly, no matter what, when needed - the additional costs are well worth it..

    Anyway, sorry for the long winded reply.. on the whole, I agree with your comments.. I just think we all need to do a better job of explaining to consumers what they are buying and what the respective benefits are of each solution - and why some solutions are priced differently, etc..

  36. #36
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Labrador, Canada
    Posts
    949
    I applied for their beta program. Never did get a reply. Guess they didn't want to do business with me. Now, the feeling is mutual

  37. #37
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    1,915
    Quote Originally Posted by cartika-andrew View Post
    Nice comments Knownhost...

    However, just to be fair, the alternate perspective would be as follows..

    - I really have not seen any recent data that would validate virtuozzo would perform better vs something like Xen, all things being equal.
    - Your comment however on the "right" provider is valid and I could see situations where a user on a shared CPU and RAM model would have more resources available to them, and for less money - as in a Xen server for example, you are locked and committed to resources (ie 1 CPU, 2 GB RAM) - and in certain situations, Virtuozzo types of models will allow customers to burst above their allocations - however, in these situations, users are bound and at the mercy of their provider to handle their allocations properly - and even then, the unforseen may happen and several customers sharing the resources may simultaneously and unexpectedly burst, thus leaving users with less resources ultimately. The flip side of your comments is that with guaranteed resources, you know exactly what you have, and you can buy more whenever you want. Additionally, if you are not in a real cloud environment, and if the node you happen to be on does not have enough resources available when you need to upgrade, what then? with a cloud solution, you will seamlessly get allocated to a node which has the available resources you are trying to purchase
    - with a local host model, what happens when the node you are hosting on goes down? raid failure? CPU or ram failure, or even power failure? a properly built cloud would be able to accommodate such scenarios without an outage, as instances would just be brought up on different host nodes. Even power failures at the DC level can be accommodated as, if built properly, providers will build out with A+B feeds, so that even if 1 power feed in a data center is affected, nodes can be brought up on alternate nodes on alternate power feeds...
    - Lastly, I do not agree with the fear approach. ie local vm host nodes are proven and the cloud approach is new therefore high risk.. we have been hosting customers on our cloud for quite awhile (have not released publicly yet) - and there are zero disadvantages over the local host model we have been publicly selling for quite some time. Fact is, local host node model presents all sorts of challenges that are absolved in the cloud model and the benefits should not be negated.. however, there is an additional cost to the consumer and the provide to address these challenges.. the truth of the matter though is, many customers do not require those advantages and certainly do not want or need to pay the premium for those advangates. If they have a node fail and are down for 15 mins here or there or a few hours every now and then to restore data - its not a big deal compared to the money they are saving.. but, to the customers that simply cannot afford to have a component fail take a site down, or who need to know that 8 cores and 16GB of ram will be available, seamlessly, no matter what, when needed - the additional costs are well worth it..

    Anyway, sorry for the long winded reply.. on the whole, I agree with your comments.. I just think we all need to do a better job of explaining to consumers what they are buying and what the respective benefits are of each solution - and why some solutions are priced differently, etc..
    Since this seems to be so much about Cloud Hosting why is this thread in the VPS Hosting forum? That's another problem. It should be in the "Speciality Hosting" section. Cloud hosting isn't replacing VPS Hosting. If anything Dedicated Hosting will suffer as that's where Cloud Hosting's advantages come into play. Most VPS customers aren't thinking of 8 cores, 16 GB's. To educate the community these topics should be in the appropriate section on WHT. My opinion but seems quite logical.

  38. #38
    Quote Originally Posted by KnownHost View Post
    Since this seems to be so much about Cloud Hosting why is this thread in the VPS Hosting forum? That's another problem. It should be in the "Speciality Hosting" section. Cloud hosting isn't replacing VPS Hosting. If anything Dedicated Hosting will suffer as that's where Cloud Hosting's advantages come into play. Most VPS customers aren't thinking of 8 cores, 16 GB's. To educate the community these topics should be in the appropriate section on WHT. My opinion but seems quite logical.
    Actually, I think you are bang on with your comments... Clouds should not be confused with VPS solutions and vice versa.. there is a certain commonality granted, and I think that is where the confusion comes in.. but, you are absolutely correct, this should probably be in the cloud hosting forum and much of this could probably be avoided..

    Cheers for now...

  39. #39
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Scotland, UK
    Posts
    2,900
    Quote Originally Posted by KnownHost View Post
    Since this seems to be so much about Cloud Hosting why is this thread in the VPS Hosting forum? That's another problem. It should be in the "Speciality Hosting" section. Cloud hosting isn't replacing VPS Hosting. If anything Dedicated Hosting will suffer as that's where Cloud Hosting's advantages come into play. Most VPS customers aren't thinking of 8 cores, 16 GB's. To educate the community these topics should be in the appropriate section on WHT. My opinion but seems quite logical.
    Without getting into the ins and outs, if VPSHive is cloud hosting rather than a VPS why on earth is it called VPSHive? Surely the confusion is not based on the forum choice here at WHT, but on the marketing of the product by GigeNet?

    If there are many technological advantages of the VPSHive offering compared to a standard VPS, then VPSHive need to make them a bit clearer. Reading their features list it simply looks like a slightly more advanced Xen based setup, where the packages aren't fixed and you can customise the space/bandwidth/ram to suit your specific needs.

    It doesn't appear to be a true cloud based setup that I could get from the 3Tera solution through LayeredTech or indeed Amazon?
    Alasdair

  40. #40
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    1,915
    Quote Originally Posted by cartika-andrew View Post
    Actually, I think you are bang on with your comments... Clouds should not be confused with VPS solutions and vice versa.. there is a certain commonality granted, and I think that is where the confusion comes in.. but, you are absolutely correct, this should probably be in the cloud hosting forum and much of this could probably be avoided..

    Cheers for now...
    I guess it will take people like you and I to get WHT to move this to the appropriate section of this forum. This will in turn help educate. Until that happens it's next to impossible.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. VPSHive (Gigenets New Product)
    By XFactorServers in forum VPS Hosting
    Replies: 186
    Last Post: 02-11-2010, 03:43 PM
  2. Gigenet down?
    By HD-Sam in forum Providers and Network Outages and Updates
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 01-10-2010, 10:32 AM
  3. GigeNET
    By HostingFields in forum Dedicated Server
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 07-09-2009, 11:54 PM
  4. GIGEnet
    By HostingFields in forum Dedicated Server
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 04-21-2008, 09:33 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
  •