Issue with 24/7 Hosting

Forums › IT Pro and developers › Issue with 24/7 Hosting

1 | ... | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | ... | 23

8222 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#1067693 17-Jun-2014 16:33

danielwd: I don't understand why people take such risks with these start-up hosting providers.

Isn't their business worth a few more dollars a month to stay online?

Every business has to start somewhere, people basically took the same risk using say Web Drive in the 90's

sifly

69 posts

Master Geek

#1067697 17-Jun-2014 16:37

Ragnor:
danielwd: I don't understand why people take such risks with these start-up hosting providers.

Isn't their business worth a few more dollars a month to stay online?

Every business has to start somewhere, people basically took the same risk using say Web Drive in the 90's

I agree.

Most of my sites are with OpenHost but I don't mind trying smaller players to see how they go. A lot of sites won't have proper business plans let alone regular incomes - so I guess the less they pay for hosting the longer they can keep going and hope they "make it big"...

danielwd

46 posts

Geek

#1067698 17-Jun-2014 16:39

Ragnor:
danielwd: I don't understand why people take such risks with these start-up hosting providers.

Isn't their business worth a few more dollars a month to stay online?

Every business has to start somewhere, people basically took the same risk using say Web Drive in the 90's

Veeeeeeeeery different landscape back then. Websites and email weren't critical services like they are now.
But yes, in 1999 we were offline for a week due to a server failure/hacking incident. Lesson learned.

mattwnz

20164 posts

Uber Geek

#1067704 17-Jun-2014 16:42

sifly:
Ragnor:
danielwd: I don't understand why people take such risks with these start-up hosting providers.

Isn't their business worth a few more dollars a month to stay online?

Every business has to start somewhere, people basically took the same risk using say Web Drive in the 90's

I agree.

Most of my sites are with OpenHost but I don't mind trying smaller players to see how they go. A lot of sites won't have proper business plans let alone regular incomes - so I guess the less they pay for hosting the longer they can keep going and hope they "make it big"...

These days companies need their website and email to be as reliable as their phone line. It was different, say 10 years ago.

sifly

69 posts

Master Geek

#1067706 17-Jun-2014 16:43

danielwd:
Ragnor:
danielwd: I don't understand why people take such risks with these start-up hosting providers.

Isn't their business worth a few more dollars a month to stay online?

Every business has to start somewhere, people basically took the same risk using say Web Drive in the 90's

Veeeeeeeeery different landscape back then. Websites and email weren't critical services like they are now.
But yes, in 1999 we were offline for a week due to a server failure/hacking incident. Lesson learned.

Goes to show then doesn't it. Nobody is impervious to something happening. It's how it is reacted to and resolved is usually the key. There is room for cheap hosting in the market - but astute business acumen is required. Just "having the knowledge" on how to run a web farm doesn't cut it...

danielwd

46 posts

Geek

#1067713 17-Jun-2014 16:54

Being "able to run" a web hosting service doesn't mean you should.

Obviously there are so many 247s and Hostbees because around it is so easy to start up with no HR and no investment.

sifly

69 posts

Master Geek

#1067716 17-Jun-2014 16:57

These days companies need their website and email to be as reliable as their phone line. It was different, say 10 years ago.

Are you saying those that paid thousands (probably) for the sites years ago would be no more pissed off than someone today? No. There are just more of them so the noise is louder. But these days it is a lot easier for any old hack to put a website up and let it run. They probably only check it 2-3 times a month. The point is, there is a market for low cost hosting - that is obvious. It's all about management.

Just sitting there telling everyone how big your sword is (not you per se) does not make you any more reliable, capable or likely to be better than the next person. Plenty of small businesses have started off out of someone else's misery and done very well. Plenty of businesses have been around for 20 years and not really advanced anywhere - but they keep going.

Quic Broadband

Move to New Zealand's best fibre broadband service (affiliate link). Free setup code: R587125ERQ6VE. Note that to use Quic Broadband you must be comfortable with configuring your own router.

sifly

69 posts

Master Geek

#1067717 17-Jun-2014 16:58

danielwd: Being "able to run" a web hosting service doesn't mean you should.

Obviously there are so many 247s and Hostbees because around it is so easy to start up with no HR and no investment.

And again - just because Hostbee is reselling, you assume they have made no investment? Or contributed to HR?

mattwnz

20164 posts

Uber Geek

#1067732 17-Jun-2014 17:10

sifly:

Are you saying those that paid thousands (probably) for the sites years ago would be no more pissed off than someone today?

Yes, because 10-15 years ago, hosting/servers/networks were not as reliable as they are today, nor was computing in general. (eg. computers crashing during usage was relatively normal). So people did expect that things may go down,as they had nothing to compare it with. As technology has improved and reliability too, and more providers have come into the market, so peoples expectations have also risen a lot. There are also a lot more people now with websites, and along with social media, there is more of a voice.
Also peoples websites now do a lot more, eg online booking, online ordering etc, so are more business critical. In the old days, most websites were simply online brochures, so weren't really business critical.

onebytemike

90 posts

Master Geek

#1068561 18-Jun-2014 15:25

sifly:
danielwd: Being "able to run" a web hosting service doesn't mean you should.

Obviously there are so many 247s and Hostbees because around it is so easy to start up with no HR and no investment.

And again - just because Hostbee is reselling, you assume they have made no investment? Or contributed to HR?

That's not the only reason to make that assumption. The platform is pretty transparent. Their HR isn't readily published and they don't have an office. That usually indicates a one or two man band.

sifly

69 posts

Master Geek

#1068591 18-Jun-2014 15:47

Not having an office - not a great look, but not a deal breaker for a start-up (I would suggest most resellers don't have commercial offices).

Not publishing HR is a crime with most hosts in this country.

"Edited due to talking to wrong person..."

Most big players resell. I cant see the issue here...

mattwnz

20164 posts

Uber Geek

#1068612 18-Jun-2014 15:58

sifly:

Not publishing HR is a crime

Most companies across most sectors won't publish HR, even big ones. I don't see that as an issue. It is also possibly due to privacy. When I speak on the phone to some orgainsations, and ask for their name, they will often only provide the first name, and they say they can't give their last name.

sifly

69 posts

Master Geek

#1068627 18-Jun-2014 16:02

mattwnz:
sifly:

Not publishing HR is a crime

Most companies across most sectors won't publish HR, even big ones. I don't see that as an issue. It is also possibly due to privacy. When I speak on the phone to some orgainsations, and ask for their name, they will often only provide the first name, and they say they can't give their last name.

And I did mean "crime" in a very light sense. I certainly don't expect private companies to publish who they have at their beck and call. In fact, with information sensitive businesses, I'd be very surprised if they did...

danielwd

46 posts

Geek

#1068642 18-Jun-2014 16:20

When I speak on the phone to some orgainsations, and ask for their name, they will often only provide the first name, and they say they can't give their last name.

This is getting really precious. It's usually a way of avoiding any personal responsibility. "John who?"

mattwnz

20164 posts

Uber Geek

#1068650 18-Jun-2014 16:42

danielwd:
When I speak on the phone to some orgainsations, and ask for their name, they will often only provide the first name, and they say they can't give their last name.

This is getting really precious. It's usually a way of avoiding any personal responsibility. "John who?"

Not sure what you mean. However when I speak to someone on the phone, I will record their name for future reference incase I need to follow it up, as the organisation may have more than one person with the first name. eg. For John, there maybe 10 Johns working for the company. Without knowing the last name, it will be a case of 'John who?' Although with some companies, you are lucky to even get a first name, and they may reply to an email with just 'Support' as the name.

1 | ... | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | ... | 23