hosting problems

[MasterJosh]

Hola, como estas? lol. Hows it going people. I have come here today to offer up my opinion about something that seems to be crucial for webmastering yet no one pays much attention. That is the specs like the OS.

Most webmasters dont care what os they're on so long as it has their favorite control panel or just works but what I am concerned with is the growing perception that most companies are in dream land still. My freind whos been looking for paid hosting has showed me many places which have great prices. For me however, I see this as a problem when I see things such as Unlimited Bw or Space. Everyone knows this is not possible and I do not believe it is fair for companies to post something that is uterly false.

Another thing that continues to annoy me is the proliferation of the OS Red Hat. Its a linux distribution and has long been seen as a good os to host websites, (though Suse and Mandrake can do the same). The problem is that Red Hat 9. Its latest distro expires in April 30, 2004. Next spring basically. Thats their latest version. Yet many companies offer Red Hat still, using the standard Red Hat 7.3. Which is due to become end of lifed in Decemer 31st this year. Im worried that these places dont realise the danger of this. EOL would be no new bug/security patches. Its quite upsetting that they would just up and drop their entire persona/home office packacge for just enterprise level os, but Red Hat has, and I fear that many hosting places will still use Red Hat like blind bats -_-.

I hope more companies fix this unlimited junk and go to a new linux distro like maybe Debian because if not. Its going to be script kiddie heaven and people will get ripped off thinking they got unlimited stuff.

 

[Cyndaquil7]

Redhat is done, FreeBSD is now the new choice for hosting companies to install into their systems for hosting. FreeBSD has got better security and runs smoother.

FreeBSD > Redhat

Just install Modernbill and cpanel+FreeBSD and your ready to host someone ;).

 

[Shining Arcanine]

Windows 2003 Server scales higher than the competition and its market share is increasing, part of which is eating into Linux market share. Dedicated server companies are offering it Linux and they are being sold faster than Linux servers. They are also reducing the pricing as a result of the lower TCO (tech support, maintaince, etc are cheaper).

Many shared hosts are sticking with Redhat. Most likely because they lack the capital to switch and maintain profitability as they have invested a great deal of money in using Redhat and if they do not use it until a certain point, they will be forced absorb a loss. Unfortunately, many are unable to absorb such a loss even the long term is better with Windows so they are forced to stick with Redhat until their profits cover the investment the made.

By the way, Windows anyone? ;)

 

[MasterJosh]

hmm interesting arcanine, However, the problem with windows is their licensing fee no? wouldnt it automaticaly add 100$ or so to the cost of creating a windows dedicated server. Im sure the hosting company would get there money back like they always do over time, but still Linux off the bat would be free.

Also how does it cost more to maintain and support a linux distrobution over a windows one? Taking this from the techy point of view its not they dont know these machines. Now grant it end users might be different but since when do they really need support? They're Control Panel does most of the work for them.