Hey all,
I am looking to get some input regarding inexpensive dedicated servers -- preferably with a hosting company the offers CentOS as an OS option. Does anybody have any input or recommendations? I'd really like to support a company that uses CentOS. And there are _so many options out there, is kind of overwhelming.
Thanks, Ryan
Hi,
We have servers with Netrino (netrino.co.uk). You can have the OS you choose with these. The servers and support are very very good from Netrino.
Richard
----- Original Message ----- From: "Ryan Lane" ryanlane@gmail.com To: centos@caosity.org Sent: Monday, January 10, 2005 4:18 PM Subject: [Centos] OT -- Inexpensive CentOS dedicated servers?
Hey all,
I am looking to get some input regarding inexpensive dedicated servers -- preferably with a hosting company the offers CentOS as an OS option. Does anybody have any input or recommendations? I'd really like to support a company that uses CentOS. And there are _so many options out there, is kind of overwhelming.
Thanks, Ryan _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@caosity.org http://lists.caosity.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
I can do that...
Peter Farrow Technical Director Sound Marketing Tel: 01225 743623 Fax: 01225 743332 Email:peter@soundnetworks.net This message is intended only for the use of the person(s) ("the intended recipient(s)") to whom it is addressed. It may contain information which is privileged and confidential within the meaning of applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender as soon as possible. The views expressed in this communication may not necessarily be the views held by Sound Marketing Ltd.
-----Original Message----- From: centos-bounces@caosity.org [mailto:centos-bounces@caosity.org] On Behalf Of Ryan Lane Sent: 10 January 2005 16:19 To: centos@caosity.org Subject: [Centos] OT -- Inexpensive CentOS dedicated servers?
Hey all,
I am looking to get some input regarding inexpensive dedicated servers -- preferably with a hosting company the offers CentOS as an OS option. Does anybody have any input or recommendations? I'd really like to support a company that uses CentOS. And there are _so many options out there, is kind of overwhelming.
Thanks, Ryan _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@caosity.org http://lists.caosity.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
On Jan 10, 2005, at 11:18 AM, Ryan Lane wrote:
I am looking to get some input regarding inexpensive dedicated servers -- preferably with a hosting company the offers CentOS as an OS option. Does anybody have any input or recommendations? I'd really like to support a company that uses CentOS. And there are _so many options out there, is kind of overwhelming.
I'm curious as to why you're not supporting a business running RHEL instead. Without RHEL, there would be no <insert_RHEL_clone_here> distribution. Granted, the CentOS is a wonderful project, and I continue using and supporting (see below) as long as it's useful to me, but if you're going to support something with _money_, why not put it where it will actually benefit the CentOS developers and community?
Buying webspace from a company using CentOS supports nobody but the company hosting your account. They paid no funds to further the development of CentOS; Red Hat and its customers do. By spending your money on a company that uses RHEL, you're helping to ensure that RHEL is successful. So long as RHEL is successful (barring any changes in policy from Red Hat), CentOS can continue to derive their releases from RHEL.
That said, if you really want to support CentOS, there is a donation form on the Caosity site (http://www.caosity.org/contributing/donations), which sponsors the CentOS project. Other non-monetary ways of supporting CentOS are:
- helping others in the mailing list and web forums - documentation (FAQ) - bug reports to Red Hat (which benefit us all)
Thanks,
-- Jason Dixon DixonGroup Consulting http://www.dixongroup.net
On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 13:05:05 -0500, Jason Dixon jason@dixongroup.net wrote:
I'm curious as to why you're not supporting a business running RHEL instead. Without RHEL, there would be no <insert_RHEL_clone_here> distribution. Granted, the CentOS is a wonderful project, and I continue using and supporting (see below) as long as it's useful to me, but if you're going to support something with _money_, why not put it where it will actually benefit the CentOS developers and community?
Buying webspace from a company using CentOS supports nobody but the company hosting your account. They paid no funds to further the development of CentOS; Red Hat and its customers do. By spending your money on a company that uses RHEL, you're helping to ensure that RHEL is successful. So long as RHEL is successful (barring any changes in policy from Red Hat), CentOS can continue to derive their releases from RHEL.
True that it does not put any funds into CentOS or Caosity.org. That's not my intent _here. My intent is to have a dedicated server preinstalled with CentOS on it. As I stated before, I am looking for an inexpensive solution. RHEL is great, but the licensing is expensive, and those costs get rolled into the monthly charges. I'm not going to be running a business on this server, so it's not like I'll have income there that would defray the cost of the server. It's just going to be a personal dev. box, with a few accounts for family and friends.
Also, I like CentOS a lot! The more hosting providers that offer CentOS, means more users and a stronger community. And that should lead to more widespread acceptance of the project.
-Ryan
I have mixed emotions about this concept. Frankly, RH has made small companies and individuals feel they really aren't worth their trouble. Their licensing scheme is, in my opinion, not very "community" oriented. They've decided to pattern it more after Microsoft. They don't want money from end users. They cancelled their end user desktop to focus on corporate users. The primary reason I don't ru RH officially is due to this attitude. I appreciate the Centos dev team for putting Centos together and would much rather donate to them.
-- <<JAV>>
Buying webspace from a company using CentOS supports nobody but the company hosting your account. They paid no funds to further the development of CentOS; Red Hat and its customers do. By spending your money on a company that uses RHEL, you're helping to ensure that RHEL is successful. So long as RHEL is successful (barring any changes in policy from Red Hat), CentOS can continue to derive their releases from RHEL.
------- End of Original Message -------
I have mixed emotions about this concept. Frankly, RH has made small companies and individuals feel they really aren't worth their trouble. Their licensing scheme is, in my opinion, not very "community" oriented. They've decided to pattern it more after Microsoft. They don't want money from end users. They cancelled their end user desktop to focus on corporate users. The primary reason I don't ru RH officially is due to this attitude. I appreciate the Centos dev team for putting Centos together and would much rather donate to them.
-- <<JAV>>
Well, everything you said is true ... but if RedHat didn't make their SRPMS so readily (and rapidly) available to the general public ... and if they didn't have such an easy to comply with trademark policy, then distros like CentOS would not exist at all. RedHat is also supporting Fedora, which is basically their Desktop product (they provide all the bandwidth and machines, and provide support via the bugzilla. RedHat is very pro open source.
I would say the deciding factor should be whether or not you need support. If you do, use RHEL ... if you don't, use CentOS. RedHat doesn't charge for the OS, only for support. If you aren't going to use the support, it would be silly to pay for it.
Buying webspace from a company using CentOS supports nobody but the company hosting your account. They paid no funds to further the development of CentOS; Red Hat and its customers do. By spending your money on a company that uses RHEL, you're helping to ensure that RHEL is successful. So long as RHEL is successful (barring any changes in policy from Red Hat), CentOS can continue to derive their releases from RHEL.
------- End of Original Message -------
CentOS mailing list CentOS@caosity.org http://lists.caosity.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Johnny Hughes wrote:
I would say the deciding factor should be whether or not you need support. If you do, use RHEL ... if you don't, use CentOS. RedHat doesn't charge for the OS, only for support. If you aren't going to use the support, it would be silly to pay for it.
You can't overlook this fact, though, even if you don't need the support. Back In The Day(tm), people would choose Sun/Oracle/BEA/NSEnt-httpd combo because it looked good to venture capitalists, so in turn got them more funding. As a client services based company, we saw this a lot - corporate decision are not always based on technical merit.
When dealing with a corporate client, there's a sense of security and warm fuzziness that is received when they choose/use/approve RHES for their project. That itself can sell them on using Linux over Windows in a major way, which is really what we're after at the end of the day - we technically could use Debian (sic), it's all linux.
We definitely get our clients into RHES as the platform, but internally we use CentOS here and there - there's no problem using both, you just have to fit the need. By choosing RHES, our clients funnel money upstream to RedHat which helps CentOS indirectly stay alive, by having those SRPMS so readily released/available. Which in turn helps us stay alive, in a small way. :)
-te
On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 14:53:09 -0400, Joe Polk wrote:
I have mixed emotions about this concept. Frankly, RH has made small companies and individuals feel they really aren't worth their trouble. Their licensing scheme is, in my opinion, not very "community" oriented. They've decided to pattern it more after Microsoft. They don't want money from end users. They cancelled their end user desktop to focus on corporate users. The primary reason I don't ru RH officially is due to this attitude. I appreciate the Centos dev team for putting Centos together and would much rather donate to them.
Completely false!
RedHat supports and pays for many engineers developing and maintaining the Fedora project. It's free, it's very well supported and nobody has to pay any fee even for the use of the RedHat servers and bandwidth as they download the ISOs and the updates.
Home users that want multimedia and wireless with frequent upgrades should use Fedora.
Corporate users that want a long and stable environment should use RHEL. If they do not want to pay for the support or the licenses, RedHat has released the full source code for their enterprise product. This is were CaOS/Tao/Fermi/WBEL... come in.
SuSE/Novell does not release their enterprise servers under the GPL licence, RedHat does. There are already betas available for RHEL 4.
-- Thanks syv@911networks.com When the network has to work
On Monday, 10 January 2005, at 13:42:55 (-0800), Syv Ritch wrote:
RedHat supports and pays for many engineers developing and maintaining the Fedora project.
Although the "many" part is subjective, the rest is fact.
It's free,
Also true.
it's very well supported
That's an opinion, not a fact.
nobody has to pay any fee even for the use of the RedHat servers and bandwidth as they download the ISOs and the updates.
Fact.
Home users that want multimedia and wireless with frequent upgrades should use Fedora.
Opinion. I would like to point out that we have our own product which does quite well for "home users" and includes numerous multimedia and wireless features. Upgrades are frequent as well. See also caos.caosity.org.
Corporate users that want a long and stable environment should use RHEL.
Opinion.
Michael
Ryan Lane wrote:
Hey all,
I am looking to get some input regarding inexpensive dedicated servers -- preferably with a hosting company the offers CentOS as an OS option. Does anybody have any input or recommendations? I'd really like to support a company that uses CentOS. And there are _so many options out there, is kind of overwhelming.
Thanks, Ryan _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@caosity.org http://lists.caosity.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
www.servermatrix.com has some really cheap dedicated servers with regular RHEL available for no extra fee. They made some mass-licensing deal with RH and run their own satellite server for updates. I've been a customer for almost a year now and I've been incredibly happy. I ordered a 2.0GHz celeron machine but they only had 2.4's so they gave me one of those at no extra cost. I originally started out on a 1000GB/month plan but at some point they just upped it to 1200/month, again no extra cost. My favorite part though is their 2-ring SLA. I've used it three times, and each time *bang* real live human on the phone in 2 rings.
-jim
I'm glad someone replied with this. I was eventually going to get around to saying the same thing. Several of the hosts in the mirror.(caosity|centos).org rrdns pool are hosted at ServerMatrix. They have provided excellent service.
jrw
www.servermatrix.com has some really cheap dedicated servers with regular RHEL available for no extra fee. They made some mass-licensing deal with RH and run their own satellite server for updates. I've been a customer for almost a year now and I've been incredibly happy. I ordered a 2.0GHz celeron machine but they only had 2.4's so they gave me one of those at no extra cost. I originally started out on a 1000GB/month plan but at some point they just upped it to 1200/month, again no extra cost. My favorite part though is their 2-ring SLA. I've used it three times, and each time *bang* real live human on the phone in 2 rings.
-jim _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@caosity.org http://lists.caosity.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
On Mon, 10 Jan 2005, Jacob Robert Wilkins wrote:
I'm glad someone replied with this. I was eventually going to get around to saying the same thing. Several of the hosts in the mirror.(caosity|centos).org rrdns pool are hosted at ServerMatrix. They have provided excellent service.
But we pay them for it - whereas some of the other hosts are provided by sponsors free of charge - such as :-
Pegasus Web Technologies VIP Hosting Hostrocket
If anyone else would like to sponsor a server as part of our mirror pool we will be shortly putting up a web page with thanks and links.
Lance
Hey all,
Thanks for all the replies. I now have a few providers to check out, which I appreciate. Sorry for causing a little stir, but it's always interesting to get a feel for everyone's different feelings/opinions. =] That's why I love this list.
-Ryan
-
Jacob Robert Wilkins -
Jason Dixon -
Jim Bartus -
Joe Polk -
Johnny Hughes -
Lance Davis -
Michael Jennings -
Peter Farrow -
Richard Wilkinson -
Ryan Lane -
Syv Ritch -
Troy Engel