I've only been at Slicehost for a couple months and I haven't had any
issues yet.  The server uptime, billing, and support have been great. 
Upgrading a slice from 512MB to 1GB worked flawlessly and relatively
quickly.  Backup snapshots of the slice work like a champ.  The admin
system isn't bad.  It's clean and easy to use.  The Ajax terminal is
slick.  You can use Slicehost to manage your DNS, which I do, but it is
a little cumbersome at first.  They also have a bunch of good articles
on installing various web servers and such.  The Slices are 64-bit and
the server on my slice has 4 CPUs/cores of which I am guaranteed one of
them, but can use more CPU if the other slices aren't busy.

In the end, I have had a really great experience so far.  I pay
$87/month for a 1GB slice, backups, and a second IP address.  I figure
that isn't that bad since I figure it was costing me about that much
when I was hosting stuff out of my house and had to deal with business
class internet, power consumption, and hardware failures.

-Chris


Eric F Crist wrote:
> Why Slicehost?
>
> /me reads...
>
> * Choice of Linux distro.
>
> Crap.
>
> Oh yeah, this is a Linux list.
>
> :)
>
> But, seriously, all seriousness aside, what were your pluses and  
> minuses for Slicehost?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Eric
>
>
> On Sep 21, 2008, at 11:14 PM, Jordan Peacock wrote:
>
>   
>> Thank you all for the feedback. I've talked to/played with a few  
>> potentials and am going to do Slicehost for the largest site....and  
>> the rest of them once I figure out how to neatly consolidate things.
>>
>> Thanks to all, and to all a good night.
>>
>> ======================
>> Jordan Peacock
>> hewhocutsdown at gmail.com
>> hewhocutsdown.blogspot.com
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Sep 21, 2008 at 9:59 AM, Eric F Crist <ecrist at secure-computing.net 
>>     
>>> wrote:
>>> Any recommendations?
>>>
>>> It's for an existing site that exceeds the CPU/RAM usage of some  
>>>       
>> of the
>>     
>>> lower-priced basic offerings from AN Hosting or GoDaddy (the  
>>>       
>> shared virtual
>>     
>>> servers). Not a heavy hard drive or bandwidth site. Currently paying
>>> $150/quarter, looking to lower that as much as possible, as this  
>>>       
>> is for a
>>     
>>> non-profit organization that is on half of a shoe-string budget as  
>>>       
>> it is.
>>     
>>> Does it make sense to upgrade my internet connection and host it  
>>>       
>> myself, or
>>     
>>> go after a hosting company? Ideally I would like to administrate  
>>>       
>> the server
>>     
>>> as well and have it run Ubuntu or Debian, but I'm not hellbent on  
>>>       
>> that.
>>
>> Sorry I'm coming into this late.  If you're not experiencing huge  
>> bandwidth requirements from any of the sites you're hosting, I'd  
>> recommend DSL and hosting things at your own home, provided you have  
>> space.  As you suggest this above, I'm guessing this isn't a problem.
>>
>> For many, many, years, I've hosted my things on a server in my own  
>> basement.  I've got DSL from ipHouse (iphouse.net), and very  
>> reliable power in my neighborhood.  Comcast is even allowing  
>> webhosting on their connections now, provided you go with the  
>> business-level service.  With that, you can get blocks of IPs, the  
>> same as has been the case with DSL for years.  Their upload speed  
>> ranges from 1 to 2 Mbps, whereas DSL caps out at ~800Kbps.  Qwest is  
>> offering a new 20Mbps fibre option, but I'm not sure about their  
>> terms on personal web hosting.
>>
>> If that doesn't work for you, I know of at least one person who uses  
>> Colo Pronto (www.colopronto.com) without too much issue.  You ship  
>> down your own 1u server, pay $25/mo and you get a 100Mb connection  
>> to the world (shared, of course).  They make their money on service,  
>> however.  Reboots, eyes and hands, etc.  I'd caution  you on them  
>> only in regards to outgoing spam.  UCEPROTECT has them listed at  
>> various levels on a fairly regular basis, a few times at level 3  
>> (the entire AS was blacklisted).
>>
>> Now, when you run you servers at home, there is going to be the  
>> occasional downtime.  No, or little, battery backup; no connection  
>> redundancy; you're out of town on vacation and cannot reboot that  
>> firewall you *had* to reconfigure from the beach.  Overall, I find  
>> it's nice to have control of things.
>>
>> ---
>> Eric Crist
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> TCLUG Mailing List - Minneapolis/St. Paul, Minnesota
>> tclug-list at mn-linux.org
>> http://mailman.mn-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/tclug-list
>>     
>
> ---
> Eric Crist
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> TCLUG Mailing List - Minneapolis/St. Paul, Minnesota
> tclug-list at mn-linux.org
> http://mailman.mn-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/tclug-list
>   

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.mn-linux.org/pipermail/tclug-list/attachments/20080922/a8a9f5a7/attachment.htm