If I didn't have access to a local company I would probably use Slicehost. *
Ryan LeTulle*
bayousoft http://twitter.com/bayousoft -twitter
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 10:02 AM, Ryan LeTulle bayousoft@gmail.com wrote:
I've also not used Amazon. My cloud experience is with a local company and there pricing is *not* based on time.
Ryan LeTulle*
bayousoft http://twitter.com/bayousoft -twitter
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 10:00 AM, Ryan LeTulle bayousoft@gmail.com wrote:
For me there are other costs associated with dedicated like backing up, co-location fees etc. These are what drive the cost up.
Ryan LeTulle*
bayousoft http://twitter.com/bayousoft -twitter
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 9:57 AM, Ryan LeTulle bayousoft@gmail.com wrote:
Nope I read and understood:
I've not seen what you describe occur in practice. In my experience the costs of a dedicated server are much higher than cloud. I run both.
Ryan LeTulle*
bayousoft http://twitter.com/bayousoft -twitter
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 9:53 AM, Earnie Boyd < earnie@users.sourceforge.net> wrote:
Ryan LeTulle wrote:
IMO A huge benefit is being able to upsize memory and processor only
when
necessary.
That is not possible with a dedicated server.
You must not have read:
they can afford it. The two dedicated servers can be cloud enabled
for
their use.
If the cost of the cloud service is by time then it can quickly become more than the cost of a dedicated server depending on use of course. But if you're not using it much then you don't need cloud services anyway and if you are using it much then two dedicated servers that act as your dedicated cloud is more beneficial.
-- Earnie -- http://progw.com -- http://www.for-my-kids.com