Question: Looking for a relatively cheap full server hosting service that is not in California

Fri 10 Sep 2010 - 8:45 pm UTC

| |

ANSWERED on Sat 9 Jan 2010 - 2:20 am UTC by mathtalk

Question: Looking for a relatively cheap full server hosting service that is not in California

Please carefully read the Disclaimer and Terms & conditions.
Priced at $30.00
The customer tipped the researcher $10.00

Actions: Add Comment

Asked by developer on Mon 28 Dec 2009 - 3:30 pm UTC:

Our small California-based company has a couple of hosted servers...one in
LA with Calpop.com and the other in Sacramento with Hostik.com.  My concern
is that if we have the "big one" in California, both servers systems (or
the power grid) could be severly affected, so I am looking for a reasonably
priced server that I can rent outside of California.  

My quick searches haven't revealed anything remotely as sweet as the deal
we get from Calpop.com (see their front page).  One thing I especially like
(and would look for in another site) is the ability to add additional
hardware (like drives and memory) for a reasonable fixed price without any
increase in the monthly or yearly charge.

I can't believe a company that operates in downtown LA can have the
cheapest offer around.  So the task is to find something comparable that is
not based in California, preferably not even the West Coast.

Uclue Researcher Request for clarification by Researcher mathtalk on Tue 29 Dec 2009 - 2:56 am UTC:

Sometimes the Subject Line has part of the question that isn't spelled out
in question Text.  Here the "full server hosting service" in the Subject
Line becomes "hosted servers" in the question Text.

So I assume we are looking for "dedicated servers" (or "colocation
housing") in the context of web hosting.

The prices CalPOP shows on their home page are not their lowest dedicated
server prices:

[Colocation Hosting in LA -- CalPOP]
http://www.calpop.com/colocation.html

This page raises an issue of whether you'd consider cabinet colocation,
which would certainly allow adding hardware (drive, memory) at a fixed cost
while leaving the periodic charges (for cabinet space, power, and
bandwidth) fixed.

I'm sure I can point you to services in other geographic areas (mine
happens to be in Florida), but I'd like to be sure about the base of
comparison.

regards, mathtalk

Question clarification by developer on Tue 29 Dec 2009 - 3:45 am UTC:

Thanks for the question.  I am not looking for colocation services (I don't
want to have to provide the server).  We are looking for a dedicated server
provided by the hosting provider.

Comment by User jmweb on Mon 4 Jan 2010 - 6:36 pm UTC:

There are many providers out there that will provide you with a dedicated
server. Most are reselling for other larger companies. The reseller's
usually have lower margins and are less profitable.

The big companies in the United States that we used to use are
ThePlanet/EV1 (which were bought out a couple years ago). A up & coming
player in Canada is a company called iWeb. iWeb's been ranked #1 by
netcraft for numerous months over the past year. 

The three companies I have mentioned are big players in the dedicated
server market. I have toured and met iWeb's management and they are on top
of their game.

A lot of smaller companies resell the data centers products, then brand
them as their own to make them look bigger. Of course, they will outright
lie and say they are not reselling but you can usually tell if someone is
or isn't reselling. Resellers will usually display pictures of a data
center with no logos. This makes it appear that they own the data center or
co-locate their when in fact they are merely pictures of the data center
where the servers are at.

If your main goal is to compare on price, then your looking at a riskier
service. Dealing with resellers is usually cheaper but increases your risk
substantially. That middleman/reseller is not the actual owner of the
equipment and therefore if you have a problem, you have to go to the
middleman. You can't go directly to data center but only through the
middleman (since to the data center their customer is actually the reseller
and not you). 

In numerous situations where the middleman/company goes out of business,
there is nothing you can do and all your data is lost. 

I have seen/heard of a lot of companies going under in this business (I
used to be in web hosting till March 2008, when I sold my company after a
very aggressive offer came along).

Uclue Researcher Request for clarification by Researcher davidsarokin on Mon 4 Jan 2010 - 7:24 pm UTC:

Will a company like this do the trick:

http://www.server67.com/


They have server data centers located in several major cities, none of them
on the west coast (click on Contact Us to see the full list).  


I'm not familiar enough with these types of services to make a full
apples-to-apples comparison to a firm like CalPop, but this looked
promising. 

Let me know if it suits your needs.


David

Question clarification by developer on Tue 5 Jan 2010 - 3:39 pm UTC:

Thanks for the suggestions.  I see I should provide more info for an
apples-to-apples comparison.  Here is what I calculate the cost is on
Calpop for a completely unmanaged server (though they provide efficient
services at a cost)

Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600, 2 Gig of Ram, Windows Server Standard; 250 Gig,
two 250 Gig sata drives in Raid-1;  10 MPS unmetered connection;   Total
2-year cost $4276 or $178 per month.  

Additional benefit.  I can add as much additional hardward (drives and Ram)
for a very reasonable fixed cost.

It seems the ones suggested would actually work, but cost about 50% more
and don't allow me to add hardware for a fixed cost.

Uclue Researcher Request for clarification by Researcher davidsarokin on Fri 8 Jan 2010 - 3:19 pm UTC:

How about these guys:

http://www.codero.com/dedicated-server/enterprise-class/


Their prices and offerings seems very similar to what you have now.  You
can see their upgrade prices by clicking on the Customize button.  

Their primary servers are in Arizona.  They also have capacity in San
Diego, so be sure to request non-California servers, if you go with this
company. 


Let me know how that looks.


David

Comment by developer on Fri 8 Jan 2010 - 5:42 pm UTC:

Actually codero would cost about twice what I'm paying at Calpop for the
same configuration.  Some of the earlier ones mentioned by user JMWeb were
closer to the mark.  Anyway, I'm willing to award the $30 for the effort. 
At least I know I have a really good deal with Calpop.  It still seems odd
that the cheapest service available is from a high-rise in downtown LA.

Uclue Researcher Request for clarification by Researcher mathtalk on Fri 8 Jan 2010 - 11:09 pm UTC:

I think the larger establishments will price unmanaged servers at a bit
less than twice the rate you cite with Calpop, and in that respect the deal
you have with them is a good deal if you are happy with their service.

There are providers who will quote something a bit more than half the rate
you wanted to compare at.  See here:

[XLHost Dedicated Servers]
http://www.xlhost.com/

In particular they currently offer a Core 2 Quad Q8200 system with 2Gb RAM
and 10Mbps bandwidth for $99/mo.  However the disk space is 1x250Gb SATA,
less than the RAID-1 duplication you asked about, and includes only 2000Gb
transfer, not the unmetered capacity you asked about.  The Windows 2003
Server adds $25/mo. if I'm reading their menu correctly.  They are located
in Columbus OH.

You are bound to be far more knowledgeable than I about the service at
Calpop, but a glance at web hosting reviews suggests a possible downtrend
for them with respect to Internet interruptions.

regards, mathtalk

Uclue Researcher Request for clarification by Researcher mathtalk on Fri 8 Jan 2010 - 11:39 pm UTC:

Here's one who actually has the unmetered bandwidth, at 100Mbps, though it
is still on the West Coast (just not in California or even US):

[eSecureData -- Dedicated Server Pricing]
http://www.esecuredata.com/Pricing/Servers.aspx

for a 2Gb RAM, Intel Quad Core system with 500Gb hard disk space.  At
$99/mo. they are located in Surrey, British Columbia, CA.  Windows 2008
Server OS is $25/mo. extra.

regards, mt

Question clarification by developer on Sat 9 Jan 2010 - 12:22 am UTC:

These last two suggestions by Mathtalk are both excellent and meet the
criteria.  Please consider this question answered.

Uclue Researcher Answer by Researcher mathtalk on Sat 9 Jan 2010 - 2:20 am UTC:

Maybe my Search Strategy will provide additional value.

I intentionally used bing.com in my search strategy, not for the search
results but to see its paid advertisements for "web hosting dedicated
servers".  That's how I found XLHost.com.

The suggestion for eSecureData.com came about from browsing reviews at
WebHostingStuff.com.  They have a "top ten" list for various categories,
the relevant one being Dedicated Hosting.

Some other promising hosters might be found by taking a second look or
varying that strategy.

 *  *  *  *  *

Here's a thinking-outside-the-box idea.  The framework of the question
involves risk mitigation, and as jmweb noted, cost minimization is apt to
increase risk exposure.  I believe developer has a good amount of
experience, so that to an extent tradeoff between risk and cost makes
sense, esp. if the company has relationships with multiple hosters.

So I would look into an inexpensive backup strategy, assuming the current
hosts are satisfactory as to cost and performance.  A larger hosting firm
which said the kind of dedicated server developer wants would run about
$300/mo. is The Planet (also mentioned by jmweb), with two data centers in
Texas and a point-of-presence in California:

[The Planet -- Dedicated Server Solutions]
http://www.theplanet.com/dedicated-server/

but they also provide cloud storage services:

[The Planet -- Storage Cloud Performance]
http://www.theplanet.com/cloud-disp/

So one approach to consider would be maintaing existing hosting
arrangements but entering into "insurance" backup planning with a
non-California hoster with extensive server capacity (so that recovery
could potentially be done quickly).


regards, mathtalk

Accepted and rated by developer on Sat 9 Jan 2010 - 4:37 am UTC:

Thanks for the "over and above" suggestions for the future.

Actions: Add Comment

Bookmark it!