From: buttcrack of the midwest Insane since: Oct 2000
posted 04-11-2006 06:10
Just in case anyone is looking a good deal on web space, http://www.jaguarpc.com/ has one. 6 gigs of space and 180 gigs of transfer for $7.95 (US). This includes a great Control Panel, PHP, all the toys.
Just wanted to share.
From: Darwin, NT, Australia Insane since: Dec 2003
posted 04-11-2006 06:18
Thanks db, I'm on the lookout for hosting right now. Our old host used to be a great deal at $AU100/yr but they advised me the other day that the new go is $AU400/yr!.
We've been having a bit of a discussion in this thread.
Have ya got any skinny on Jaguar; TP seems to think 1+1 is OK - I dunno - I'm a 24 carat mug
Cheers
From: buttcrack of the midwest Insane since: Oct 2000
posted 04-12-2006 02:06
The sites I have hosted there are definately low traffic ones, but I`ve been with them for 3 or 4 years. Since before their merger with Ailenhosting. Never had a problem. Help is available and very knowledgeable. They also now have a 100% uptime guarantee. The cointrol panel is easy to use and loaded with options .
The disk space/bandwidth seems too good to be true....it seems this has been happening a bit lately with hosts.
I love the idea of that kind of space, but I am instantly suspicious.
One thing I can't seem to find is what they run on - they mention their servers a lot, but I couldn't locate anywhere that specifies if it's linux/apache or something else. Any idea?
I am looking for a host, and could really use this kind of storage...
From: Darwin, NT, Australia Insane since: Dec 2003
posted 04-12-2006 06:02
Yup, all sounds good, eh DL; I'm just real wary - if it sounds too good to be true, usually is
We don't need all that much bandwidth - but ya can't have too much storage!
Still - gotta do something soon......May 1 we havta be in a new place.
[sense] Organisation is anathema to organisations [/sense]
If I recall Jaguar is a straight LAMP outfit running Red Hat when I was there
Storage and bandwidth are cheap/sorted now, CPU and electricity are the big cost points. Every host is upping storage because it hardly matters and it customers like it. Not many people will fill their allotment but if they do it's more than likely just file storage and that'll have no impact on CPU or power so it's feasible. Not too good to be true.
DH offers 20GB for their lowest plan now, I am approaching the level of allowed storage on dreamhost's servers now as I have in my 3 desktops and 2 laptops and an external harddrive! With that kind of storage available people are going to start doing backups to their webservers, then we're back to bandwidth isseus. It's always something
If I were to be recommending a host to a client, are the selling points in favor of taking DH over something like jaguar, or vice versa?
It seems like the landscape has changed dramatically since only a few months ago when I was last looking around. I've heard an awful lot lately about problems at dreamhost, but have heard so much good press in the past. I am very curious if there is something that sets them apart that I should be aware of!
when recommending to a client you should be comparing shared to dedicated, not shared to shared. The nature of shared hosting means certain problems that are common to all, but when you compare the cost to dedicated, with your customer, they're much happier to suffer the hiccups they'll inevitably experience with and shared hosting
That said it's been very rare that I've had a client of mine contact me with a hosting issue, they never notice the occassional brief downtime.
You will get calls if mail service is interrupted but with DH that's been only momentary lapses for the most part. In the last 5 years I've had one client using shared hosting ever call regarding a true email service outtage. They have 30 mailboxes so they've more likely to notice than the small shops and we've had the shared vs dedicated talk so they know the risk/benefit/cost alaysis stuff.
The more you can keep your clients in the loop to a certain degree as described above, the more they trust you and the more comforatble they feel. Like everything, people fear the worst unless they know different.
as for Dreamhost's recent string of troubles it's for real, but mostly FUD from n00b users signin gup for the great deals and being completely out of their element. The real troubles they are facing are growth which means a lot of things in alot of different areas, but they're good people who will work to get things to top notch asap.
One of their growth problems has to do with power at the moment. They are in the same datacenter as mediatemple among others and with power costs rising, and servers getting beefier (sucking more power), the building doesn't have enough power. They're upgrading power to the building but they've suspended sales of dedicated servers since I dunno? September?
when I was with Jaguar on a site they were in the middle of growing pains like DH's, but it was much worse and I went running back to DH. Bob tells me they cleared up shortly thereafter I hope the "much worse" is not a sign of things to come from DH
I'm late for church, hopefully that's enough foo for now
Thanks a bunch, JK.
This client is definitely not in the market for a dedicated plan (they're cheap ). I'm a bit out of my element when it comes to what separates a good host from bad.
DB's support for their service is good for me, but I do like to understand what it is I'm dealing with =)
what seperates a good host from the bad in the shared world for me is responsiveness and transparency when dealing with problems. Your client just wants service that never causes them any pain. Most hosts with a good reputation are a safe bet but you relly should explain the differences between shared and dedicated, an under-promise over-deliver philosophy will keep you a hero.
Other things that seperate good from bad are probably all webmatery things and no consideration for the client at all.
I used to heavily prefer DH's approach to things: nerdcore. They use Debian Linux which is usually a little behind other distributions but rock solid and secure. THeir configs are focused on sp[eed and security so some canned scripts and coding philosophies need to be tweaked to accomodate, not so much so any longer however. They use their own hand made control panel (web panel) that is miles beyond what standard redhat/cpanel hosts can manage in terms of seamless integration with all facets of hosting/business management things, or so it used to be, haven't been with a cpanel host in a long time.
The standard RedHat CPanel host differs from DH in that they are more standardized, CPanel is not just a control panel, it largely dictates the way you will run your hosting business. DH does their business and builds their network and systems to suit.
DH is much more flexible and able to respond creatively to customer input. Downside may be that as they grow things mebbe don't scale well? Where documentation is lacking a small change effects a bigger picture? All this is purely speculation on my part, just kind of applying experiences from other areas of life and business into this.
DH is a hard choice to make right now. I wonder about their growth and how they're dealing with it. But all shared hosts have these kinds of problems at some point in their lifespans, if not multiple times on a cycle, it really is inevitable.
If there's anything I can help you with from the specs side of the issue I'd be happy to. They make quite a lot of server side toys available and if you're truly a unix weiner you can do about anything you like!