Cloudatcost 80% off
-
Corrected the link in my first post to show the 30 day trial, and also the above post has a link to the price calculator
-
@NattNatt said:
Corrected the link in my first post to show the 30 day trial, and also the above post has a link to the price calculator
Why are they hiding that and only putting the "Quote" button on the main page? That's foolish. Talk about turning customers away for no reason.
-
So the 2x2 is one quid less than Digital Ocean's UK offering that is similar.
-
That they are advertising a partnership with VMware honestly worries me a lot. That's the same "first red flag" that we had with CloudatCost and why we knew something was wrong there right away. VMware is not cost effective for a cloud provider.
-
DO and Vultr offer similar systems for $20 a month... I'm paying $25 a month to KimSufi and have got 8x the ram, and 2TB of spinning rust storage for $25 a month. I have console access to my machine if I need it, I can get into recovery mode if I need it... if something happens to my spinning rust, they replace it, and I restore from backups... and go (I am unaware of any RAID on this particular server, or if they even offer that).
The Data Center where this physical box is located has redundant power and internet, etc. I am only less protected against physical problems with the box. than if I were to use DO or Vultr.
I am starting to wonder why should I choose a VPS like DO or Vultr or C@C (I already paid for mine, lol)... vs a Dedicated server somewhere?
-
@dafyre said:
I am starting to wonder why should I choose a VPS like DO or Vultr or C@C (I already paid for mine, lol)... vs a Dedicated server somewhere?
Only reason that there has ever been... elastic capacity. That is the singular purpose of cloud computing.
http://www.smbitjournal.com/2013/06/when-to-consider-a-private-cloud/
If you can't leverage elasticity, then you are paying a premium for a service you aren't using.
-
@dafyre For me it's all about price. Only running an occasional connection to it via OpenVPN and not much else yet means I really only need that $4 or $5 a month VPS.
The VPS is probably not going to have as much downtime as a dedicated server with a single drive assuming they're in the same environment. If you need the processing, ram, storage and don't mind a little bit of downtime then that dedicated server you have is great.
-
@dafyre said:
I am starting to wonder why should I choose a VPS like DO or Vultr or C@C (I already paid for mine, lol)... vs a Dedicated server somewhere?
Thinking of them as VPS is the problem. The are VPS style clouds. But they are clouds, that is their actual product category, not VPS. They are VPS too, but pure VPS (non-cloud) is very different under the hood. You can deliver VPS for a fraction of the cost of cloud.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
That they are advertising a partnership with VMware honestly worries me a lot. That's the same "first red flag" that we had with CloudatCost and why we knew something was wrong there right away. VMware is not cost effective for a cloud provider.
Yep.. Allowing you to have your own private ESXi cloud is one thing.. (rackspace and most will do this if you give them enough $$$)..
But running the whole backbone infustructure on vmware is stupid.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@dafyre said:
I am starting to wonder why should I choose a VPS like DO or Vultr or C@C (I already paid for mine, lol)... vs a Dedicated server somewhere?
Thinking of them as VPS is the problem. The are VPS style clouds. But they are clouds, that is their actual product category, not VPS. They are VPS too, but pure VPS (non-cloud) is very different under the hood. You can deliver VPS for a fraction of the cost of cloud.
CloudatCost was mostly VPS until they allowed the CloudPro, but it's still not as eslatic, you can't add resource/remove them on the fly you have to destory and re-create only.
-
@Jason said:
@scottalanmiller said:
That they are advertising a partnership with VMware honestly worries me a lot. That's the same "first red flag" that we had with CloudatCost and why we knew something was wrong there right away. VMware is not cost effective for a cloud provider.
Yep.. Allowing you to have your own private ESXi cloud is one thing.. (rackspace and most will do this if you give them enough $$$)..
But running the whole backbone infustructure on vmware is stupid.
Right, there are good reasons to choose VMware in house, especially for a large enterprise. But Vmware for a commodity public cloud AND using SAN... it was quite obvious that they were trying to buy software rather than having to have even a single person who knew how these things worked.
-
@Jason said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@dafyre said:
I am starting to wonder why should I choose a VPS like DO or Vultr or C@C (I already paid for mine, lol)... vs a Dedicated server somewhere?
Thinking of them as VPS is the problem. The are VPS style clouds. But they are clouds, that is their actual product category, not VPS. They are VPS too, but pure VPS (non-cloud) is very different under the hood. You can deliver VPS for a fraction of the cost of cloud.
CloudatCost was mostly VPS until they allowed the CloudPro, but it's still not as eslatic, you can't add resource/remove them on the fly you have to destory and re-create only.
Yeah, they never even figured it out... like I don't mean the business model, they never even figured out what it means to be a cloud provider.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@Jason said:
@scottalanmiller said:
That they are advertising a partnership with VMware honestly worries me a lot. That's the same "first red flag" that we had with CloudatCost and why we knew something was wrong there right away. VMware is not cost effective for a cloud provider.
Yep.. Allowing you to have your own private ESXi cloud is one thing.. (rackspace and most will do this if you give them enough $$$)..
But running the whole backbone infustructure on vmware is stupid.
Right, there are good reasons to choose VMware in house, especially for a large enterprise. But Vmware for a commodity public cloud AND using SAN... it was quite obvious that they were trying to buy software rather than having to have even a single person who knew how these things worked.
This cloud is run using openstack - we have a partnership with VMWare for some of our enterprise clients etc, we use all sorts of things depending on what the client wants - everything isn't run off VMWare - but we do have a few large clients that demand it, so we offer it... eCloudFlex is a new solution, built in house using openstack etc, designed for Linux mainly...gives a console as standard, but you can connect pretty much anyway you want (putty etc too) - I just use it as it's handy though, it spins up a new instance in about 30 seconds, so can mess, break stuff, then delete and re-create etc without fear...
-
@Jason said:
But running the whole backbone infustructure on vmware is stupid.
This is why I use KVM on my host. 8-)
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@dafyre said:
I am starting to wonder why should I choose a VPS like DO or Vultr or C@C (I already paid for mine, lol)... vs a Dedicated server somewhere?
Only reason that there has ever been... elastic capacity. That is the singular purpose of cloud computing.
http://www.smbitjournal.com/2013/06/when-to-consider-a-private-cloud/
If you can't leverage elasticity, then you are paying a premium for a service you aren't using.
Am I wrong to assume that sites like DO & Vultr offer this kind of elasticity -- or is that something that they just hide internally? I mean you can technically get that with pretty much any virtualization platform these days, as long as you have enough servers to handle the extra VMs scaling out.
What would call what I have with KimSufi?
-
@NattNatt said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@Jason said:
@scottalanmiller said:
That they are advertising a partnership with VMware honestly worries me a lot. That's the same "first red flag" that we had with CloudatCost and why we knew something was wrong there right away. VMware is not cost effective for a cloud provider.
Yep.. Allowing you to have your own private ESXi cloud is one thing.. (rackspace and most will do this if you give them enough $$$)..
But running the whole backbone infustructure on vmware is stupid.
Right, there are good reasons to choose VMware in house, especially for a large enterprise. But Vmware for a commodity public cloud AND using SAN... it was quite obvious that they were trying to buy software rather than having to have even a single person who knew how these things worked.
This cloud is run using openstack - we have a partnership with VMWare for some of our enterprise clients etc, we use all sorts of things depending on what the client wants - everything isn't run off VMWare - but we do have a few large clients that demand it, so we offer it... eCloudFlex is a new solution, built in house using openstack etc, designed for Linux mainly...gives a console as standard, but you can connect pretty much anyway you want (putty etc too) - I just use it as it's handy though, it spins up a new instance in about 30 seconds, so can mess, break stuff, then delete and re-create etc without fear...
What hypervisor are you using? OpenStack can be any, it's just the management layer on top.
-
@dafyre said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@dafyre said:
I am starting to wonder why should I choose a VPS like DO or Vultr or C@C (I already paid for mine, lol)... vs a Dedicated server somewhere?
Only reason that there has ever been... elastic capacity. That is the singular purpose of cloud computing.
http://www.smbitjournal.com/2013/06/when-to-consider-a-private-cloud/
If you can't leverage elasticity, then you are paying a premium for a service you aren't using.
Am I wrong to assume that sites like DO & Vultr offer this kind of elasticity -- or is that something that they just hide internally? I mean you can technically get that with pretty much any virtualization platform these days, as long as you have enough servers to handle the extra VMs scaling out.
Yes, DO and Vultr are true cloud.
The elasticity is provided through the API. Your own virtualization in house is not well designed to handle that. You have to make your new VMs yourself, for example, they are not self creating. Cloud is meant to be self provisioning.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@NattNatt said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@Jason said:
@scottalanmiller said:
That they are advertising a partnership with VMware honestly worries me a lot. That's the same "first red flag" that we had with CloudatCost and why we knew something was wrong there right away. VMware is not cost effective for a cloud provider.
Yep.. Allowing you to have your own private ESXi cloud is one thing.. (rackspace and most will do this if you give them enough $$$)..
But running the whole backbone infustructure on vmware is stupid.
Right, there are good reasons to choose VMware in house, especially for a large enterprise. But Vmware for a commodity public cloud AND using SAN... it was quite obvious that they were trying to buy software rather than having to have even a single person who knew how these things worked.
This cloud is run using openstack - we have a partnership with VMWare for some of our enterprise clients etc, we use all sorts of things depending on what the client wants - everything isn't run off VMWare - but we do have a few large clients that demand it, so we offer it... eCloudFlex is a new solution, built in house using openstack etc, designed for Linux mainly...gives a console as standard, but you can connect pretty much anyway you want (putty etc too) - I just use it as it's handy though, it spins up a new instance in about 30 seconds, so can mess, break stuff, then delete and re-create etc without fear...
What hypervisor are you using? OpenStack can be any, it's just the management layer on top.
Honestly don't know - I wasn't involved in the build of it, just know what I've been told in demonstrations etc, will ask and see if I can find out for you if you want?
I thought open-stack was the hypervisor and management layer tbh! -
@dafyre said:
@Jason said:
@travisdh1 said:
They're still bugging me after triple billing me. Hopefully it means the company is 80% gone.
Likely
I still have my Plex server over there... I wonder if my login will even work... gasp It works, lol!
We haven't been using that server for Plex much lately (got a few things to upload to it still). Having a local Plex server is nice for quickly watching stuff and then sending it off-site for archival later.
LOL - I never even considered hosting my plex server offsite lol. I just hibernate my desktop when I don't need it and wake it up when I do.
-
They just announced 100 free servers and are rolling out discounts throughout the day, starting with 90% off. Despicable.
I found this company about a year ago and couldn't resist temptation. Spent well over $1600 (at 90% off, so like 68vcpu) and haven't been able to host a SINGLE project due to disk instability. VM's go into read-only mode or are simply unconnectable within days of provisioning.
