Is Blue Square Now Getting Too Expensive

Apr 12, 2008

is Blue Square now starting to get too expensive for some if not most webhosts that dont already have a large customer base?

I can remember about 6 months or somthing back when rack space would to be around ~£580 for 42u but now its at £700 thats with 8amps and no transit.

Bluesquare is known to be a very good and still is a nice alternative than london, however I think now london has become a cheaper alternative, what do you guys and gals think?

Yes I understand the need to charge more as the data centre fills up to capacity, and to pay for BSQ3-4 which are opening soon etc but im just curious about what do people think etc, im not having a moan they do and still do a brilliant service regardless of price.

View 13 Replies


ADVERTISEMENT

Blue Host

May 21, 2008

My company is currently setting up a webpage and was recommended to use Blue Host as the hosting server and domain. Has anyone had experiences with them and if so are they any good?

View 14 Replies View Related

Whats Up With BLUE VIRTUAL

Oct 3, 2009

I have been with Blue Virtual (bluevirtual.com) for many years, since the Communitech days. However, the service these past few weeks has gone downhill big time.

The BV forums are dead, the webhosting is up and down like a yoyo, mail is intermittent.

Not just me but fellow users are experiencing the same.

Support tickets are going unanswered (accounts & tech. support).

View 14 Replies View Related

Is Blue Host Really Worth It

Dec 16, 2008

I wanted to reach out to WH Talk users and see what there experience with Blue Host has been like. I've heard some good things and some bad things about buying hosting for a blog on there website. I like that they have private domains names and give you unlimited hosting but is it really worth $6.95 per month.

I see a few other hosting companies that charge a little less but don't offer as much. Can anyone share there experience with this hosting service before I make a decision?

View 11 Replies View Related

Yahoo! Vs. Blue Host

Dec 10, 2008

I am a hobbyist webmaster wanting to start a third website.

As a newbie, I started my website with Yahoo! Small Business. I didn’t know anything about hosting at that time and their ads captivated me. Also, there was confidence in dealing with a billion dollar company.

A couple of months later, when I started my second website I opted for Blue Host because I saw their ad on Word Press and I thought that anybody endorsed by WP would have to be good.

I am now in a position to compare and what I find is this:Yahoo!Cost$11.95 per monthEmails 250 in 24 hoursAdd-On Domains NilSupport Nil (only email)Fantastico Nil (Limited)Non-domain emailsNot permitted.htaccess Not allowedBlue HostCost $6.95 per monthEmails 500 per hour (12,000 in 24 hours)Add-On Domains UnlimitedSupport 24/7 live chatFantastico FullNon-domain emails Permitted.htaccess Allowed
Yahoo! has had its fair share of downtime (a fortnight ago there was a server 500 error which lasted several hours). Also some months ago some of my files were infected by a javascript virus (though this may have been my fault for uploading files without virus protection).

I am quite happy with BH because I am paying less, get unlimited add-on domains (I added four very easily) and get 24/7 chat support (with Yahoo! you only get an automated email response after 24 - 48 hours!)

It is said that you get what you paid for. I am paying Yahoo! more but what am I getting in return which I am not getting from BH?

Or to put it another way: Why would someone (reasonably instructed) opt for Yahoo! over BH and others?

Is Yahoo! just a rip-off or am I missing something here?

View 14 Replies View Related

Colocation Is Too Expensive

Jun 5, 2008

I am used to paying costs such as $180 - $250 per month but my local colocation is charging $350 per month just for the bandwidth. Plus it is confusing how they price it they do not have a one set price for the whole month like normal hosts, they charge 1 MB per minute bandwidth average.

View 14 Replies View Related

Current Host Has Become Too Expensive

Mar 13, 2008

I've currently got a friend hosting me but I'm paying £5 ($10) per month ($120 per year) which is quite expensive for what I need.

I currently have two accounts- one personal FTP / Email and one shop where I'm selling CDs. So I need FTP / Email / and MySQL.

I'm winding down the CD store so I rarely get sales now, and I don't require much storage (couple of GB) or very much transfer at all.

Can anyone recommend a good host to me? I'm just looking for something reliable, the less expensive the better (Even free, if that's possible.)

I've been looking at Amazon's web services. Does anyone know if they're suitable for what I want? Their rates seem excellent.

View 14 Replies View Related

Why Is Colocation More Expensive Then Getting A Server

Oct 6, 2009

I've been shopping for colocation (1U) in South Florida and the prices I've been getting were much higher then if I would just lease a server at a datacenter. I thought you could save alot of money since you are only leasing space and bandwith.

View 14 Replies View Related

Why Is Hyper-V More Expensive Than Virtuozzo

Aug 9, 2008

I'd really like to find a Hyper-V VPS provider (or a Xen/ESX provider) and I've been stunned thus far to see each provider charging more for Hyper-V than Virtuozzo (e.g.

VPSland and Crystal Tech.). Why does this surprise me? Well, Hyper-V is included with the OS, whereas Virtuozzo is an extra cost. You might say, "But yeah, Virtuozzo gets around having to have a separate license for each OS install since its actually just one OS." Actually, that's not true, Microsoft clarified their licensing position and said that each instance does need a license. I'm guessing most hosting providers know this...So why the price hike?

View 9 Replies View Related

Bandwidth So Expensive In Toronto

May 15, 2007

Ive been comparing prices from between montreal bandwidth and toronto bandwidth and i dont see why there is a HUGE difference in price.. Could anyone clear this up for me ?

I am looking to co-locate a server in the toronto area but everything is like $100 for ~160gig of monthly bandwidth.

View 14 Replies View Related

Why Is Colo More Expensive Than Dedicated Hosting

Apr 25, 2009

For the last few weeks I have been looking around at various colo and dedi offers here and there because I was thinking of saving some money by colocating a server and I noticed that everyone who offers both colo and dedi have things fixed so that the colo is much more expensive than renting a dedi from the same people in the exact same datacenters!

You would think that since a brand new server costs between $500 and $2500 to build or buy that amortizing of the cost of the hardware would make the dedis more expensive but in fact the opposite is true 90% of the time and only rarely does a host offer a colo plan that even matches their dedi plans. There are exceptions, like FDC for example but most of the time when you sit down and look at the price per mbps and the price per amp the colocation for a standard 8GB/quadcore/500GB server doing 2 TB of bandwidth is more just in monthly rental than if you rented a dedi(that the company owns).

So, in other words if I am renting a dedi with 8GB RAM, Quadcore CPU, 500GB hard drive with 5000 GB bandwidth quota on a 100mbps uplink for $125 to $150 a month and I wanted to save money by swapping it out with my own dedi of the same specs I would right away lose the cost of the dedi and then each month lose even more just in the colo fees along.

So what exactly is going on here? Are hosts overselling their dedis and making losses on a few but profits on most? And then on top of that artificially bloating their colo prices to encourage people to rent dedis instead? Or...do they just bloat colo prices out of fear and expectation that anyone who colos will be blasting their servers to the max and sucking up the mostest amps while using all the bandwidth that they buy?

View 14 Replies View Related

Bandwidth Carriers Expensive And Cheap

Aug 13, 2009

A major part of web hosts are running linux these days, with congestion control mechanism 2.6 kernel and windows 2008 are now able to get full speed over higher latency even 200+, with the DSL an all major part of countries access to internet has been easy.

Now question is how exactly an expensive carrier such as MCI/ATT can make a difference for a website. expensive i mean by anything over $10 per mbit. Am sure for things like mission critical, financial institutions and for websites who need reach for every corner of 3rd world countries would need the best of the breed bandwidth. ok for the others who is always a regular guy or small business, is the expensive provider worth it? am trying to find out. please write your opinions on cheap/medium/expensive providers worthness of using such.

Internap is whole different as it will make a bandwidth mix superior which bgp can not do.

View 6 Replies View Related

Why Is NYC Not That Expensive For Single Server Colo

Jan 31, 2007

From reading these boards for a couple years now, I always had the impression that colo was cheapest in Texas or thereabouts, and was priciest in places like NYC. (Of course, I'm referring to relatively comparable service.)

Now I finally have a need for a single server colo (1U). The most-mentioned places in Texas on these boards are cologuys, colo4dallas, etc. Most of them have reasonable rates listed right on their website, around $100-170 for the bandwidth that I need, about 1.5Mbps.

But I've also been requesting quotes from various providers in NYC, who are also popular on these boards. And while there are some in the $200-250 range, which is what I was expecting, there are some that are mentioned highly on these boards (toqen, thenynoc, razorblue, etc.) that are quoting $60-100/month for the same amount of bandwidth.

I.e., not only comparable but in fact *lower* than the Texas colos.

What am I missing here? It's very possible that I'm comparing apples to oranges, cuz I really don't know any of these businesses. Just forming an opinion based on what gets recommended here on a consistent basis.

View 4 Replies View Related

Recommend A Managed Host For Me (Like Rackspace But Less Expensive)

Mar 16, 2008

I'm looking for a managed server (mid range specs) and approximately 20TB monthly bandwidth.

I'm looking for reasonably priced hosts, that have a reputation "very similiar" to Rackspace.com. I don't want to quite pay what Rackspace's pricing looks like. So, I'm looking for something slightly cheaper than Rackspcae, but that have a VERY good record for promptness in addressing issues and with proven uptime records.

So far I am considering Verio & The Planet. My knowledge of hosts beyond that is very limited. Please point me in the right direction as to where I can find hosts with SOLID records like Rackspace.com, but are slightly less expensive.

View 14 Replies View Related

Is Colocation More Expensive Than Reselling Dedi-boxes?

Feb 18, 2007

I currently run 16 boxes which I rent from various data centers, mark-up and resell. Conventional wisdom says that it's time for me to start colocating my own servers. I've got approval for capital (loan) so it's no problem for me to just buy these boxes and colo them. But... how the hell does anyone afford it?

I mean, I can get a cabinet in H.E. with 10Mbps burst to 100Mbps for $600/mo (through EGI). Which is an insanely good deal until you realize that it only includes 15amps of power. So (I think) that means that I can really only run about 15 or 20 Celerons at the most. So much for filling up the rack.

Optimistically, if I can run 20 Celerons which I've priced at about $700 each including shipping -- plus a switch, KVM, spare parts and bank interest over 24 months -- that's about $800/mo for the servers plus $600 for the cab, plus about $200/mo for remote hands in case I need the DC guys to do something. I'm looking at about $80/mo per server which I have to pay whether it's rented or not.

I can easily find celerons for $80/mo which include some level of support and I can very easily cancel whenever my client does and buy a fresh new one whenever I get a new client.

I was all excited to go colo -- but the numbers don't add up. What am I missing here? What's the big advantage to all the extra hassle of owning your own?

View 14 Replies View Related

Is Bandwidth The Expensive Part Of Video Sites

Mar 3, 2009

Is bandwidth going to be my most expensive cost if I open up a video hosting site? Is there a inexpensive alternative? Is there an inexpensive web host with low cost bandwidth allocation?

View 9 Replies View Related

Least Expensive FULLY MANAGED Dedicated Server

Sep 18, 2008

I wanted a completely fully managed server -- meaning everything is taken care of and I do not have to hire a server admin -- what would be the least expensive pricing from a reputable hosting provided?

View 14 Replies View Related

Blue Host And Host Monster Is Operated By The Same People

Aug 3, 2008

I was with Blue Host and their support and service was pretty bad. Servers going down all the time, and chat support was terrible. Then I moved to Host Monster and received the same kind of service/support. I later then figured out that Blue Host and Host Monster is runned by the same people. For example, I opened up a tech support ticket with Host Monster and then they replied signing their signature with Blue Host. So I got the same service: terrible tech support and servers kept going down. Now I'm looking for a new web hosting. I a few people here gave Host Gator some good reviews. I hope Host Gator is not run be the same people that runs Blue Host and Host Monster.

View 15 Replies View Related

Preference For Host Excellence Compared To Blue Host

Jul 8, 2008

Does anyone have a preference for Host Excellence compared to Blue Host?

Do you think their basic offers are the same?

This is for just a couple of simple domains and sites to be hosted.

View 8 Replies View Related

Why Is Cheap Colo More Expensive Than Cheap Dedicated?

Oct 19, 2007

This is probably a dumb question, but I've been curious about something. While shopping around for either a cheap dedicated server (less than $75/mo) or a cheap colo for a 1u server, I have noticed that the cheap dedicated servers are often less than a cheap colo, which seems odd to me since with a colo you bring your own machine.

For example, Sago Networks has cheap dedicateds for $50, $59, $79 etc. yet their cheapest colo option is $99. For Sago's $50 dedicated you get 1000GB transfer and 2 IP's, and with their $99 colo you get only get 100 GB transfer and 1 IP.

And Sago is not unusual in this respect. I've priced other providers that fall into this category and they have similar differences.

So why is colo more expensive than dedicated for similar, if not lower, features?

View 14 Replies View Related







Copyrights 2005-15 www.BigResource.com, All rights reserved