Do You Think Its Worth Getting A Cheap Dedicated Box

[Lee]

Just to use for hosted promo tools?

I have 2 servers right now and im considering getting another one just to utilize for hosted promo tools and such like because of a bunch of new things im going to be launching on Condom Cash shortly.

Does anyone here have a dedicated server just for their hosted promo materials and if so, did you notice any negatives/positives about having a setup like that?

Regards,

Lee

[basschick]

when i worked with one company, the main thing we noticed about hosting the content on cheaper servers was that it cost way less

otherwise, there are many very good quality hosts with low priced bandwidth, so there shouldn't be a real difference.

[MMemmer]

Hello Lee,

We are certainly not the cheapest that can be found out in the market but Caro.Net can deliver a quality product to you for a very competitive rate, hit me up if you want to discuss a special deal!

[blappr]

Hey Lee,

If you just need to serve static content, have you checked out the possibility of using S3?

Also, you might consider going with a VPS. slicehost.com and rimuhosting.com offer some very affordable VPS plans with lots of bandwidth for not a lot of money plus you get all the control of a dedicated server.

Just some alternatives to consider.

[Chilihost]

there are several problems with cheaper servers:
1) they are generally unmanaged, meaning that if you don't know how to update your kernel or o/s or other software, you will likely get hacked eventually
2) they are generally unmonitored, so if your server crashes on a friday arvo of a long weekend when you have decided to finally take the time to visit your mum who does not have an internet connection...your server will stay offline till you return on Monday, you will have lost sales and your affiliates will get pissed off with you and may just leave your program
3) they generally use cogent or other non-teir1 bandwidth, meaning that they are slower and we all know slower pageloads results in more people clicking away out of frustration, plus of course this is their first impression on your site and if they find slow loading vids or pics then they will be less likely to join
4) cheaper servers really aren't that much cheaper

[gaybucks_chip]

It all depends on what your comfort level is with various things.

We have two of our servers with National Net, and three others spread out among two other providers.

Our gallery server is with a low-cost provider. It's an unmanaged box, but it also costs probably about 1/3 of what a managed hosting provider like NatNet would charge. I do all the basic admin with it, and so far, the provider has been excellent about providing quick support where needed. We do our own server monitoring on all of our boxes, so we know immediately if a box is down, and we do have to use a contracted tech consultant every now and then, but even with those costs factored in, it's a lot cheaper simply because it uses so much bandwidth. Yes, the off-brand bandwidth is probably a bit slower, but I've never had a complaint from an affiliate, and we track things pretty carefully as far as load times and uptime.

I absolutely believe that having critical boxes with a provider such as NatNet makes a lot of sense, but to be honest, we've had maybe 6 hours of downtime in the past 2 years with the low-cost provider, which includes fixing a failed hard drive and reloading the server, so that's still better than 99% uptime.

One solution might be to put the gallery services on your gallery server, but have a backup version ready to roll on your NatNet server so if something goes wrong with the gallery provider, you can change the entry in DNS and be pointing to your NatNet server within a few minutes.

[steven619]

I always agree with dedicated servers since you have so much more control over them and you are less likely to get hit by something from another site on a shared server.

There are reasons some hosting companies charge more for bandwidth, co-location, or servers. At least with those companies that have been around for a few years with no negative comments.

Another choice, if you are not ready for a dedicated server you can always find a place that offers a true VPS (virtual private server). Since you already have a dedicated server you know how important quality and service are.

I'm used and purchased Cogent before and I can tell you the issues first hand. Though I had a 99.999% uptime and my MRTG showed very few issues I was able to run tests from different points around the world. No matter where it was.. Cogent traffic took longer and had more delay then any of the 6 Tier 1 providers I use. Then again...the one client was just focused on price and it worked for them.

So... the answer always comes down to value and price. If you dont' need the valued added benefits from a dedicated server on a tier 1 provider (multi-homed, quickest path routing) a shared (or VPS) will work fine till you are ready to upgrade. If it costs your $200 more a month to get $20 more in sales.. don't upgrade.

Fast site loads = more happy surfers that tend to stick.

It is a hard choice but ask yourself what you expect as far as speed and uptime if you are the customer surfing your site.