[Palad1n]

I have found www.eukhost.com good for VPS's....

Still have a VPS with them as backup NS, Mail, etc.

[HoundOfTheSmith]

Given that it's purely to host my personal domain, which gets very little traffic and results in a tiny load, dedicated is overkill. Actually, running it myself is overkill, but hey, I'm a geek

I was looking at an RPS or VPS as it gives me the chance to do the things I want to (that I can't with shared hosting), but at a cost level I can live with. I'll spend some more time lurking and watching the RPS technology mature before I jump that way I think - in the short term a VPS looks like the right choice for now.

Thanks all.

[IainK]

I would recommend a dedicated server unless you are only planning to host 1 or 2 websites.
With the price of the Kimsufi at £23/month inc vat you can't go wrong with that and it will host a fair whack of sites as long as you don't try to run a control panel software on it!

[Andy]

Andy,

As I'm currently considering an RPS (instead of a similarly priced VPS from somewhere else), are you able/willing to expand upon the "niggles" comment?

Thanks

The main niggle was that the iSCSI hard disk would fail to connect to the RPS 9 times out of 10 and would sometimes be slow causing bad performance. Since this is a new technology, OVH are working on the problems to try and make it better but its taking longer than they expected to work out some of the problems such as why it fails to connect and bad speed etc.

[HoundOfTheSmith]

Andy,

As I'm currently considering an RPS (instead of a similarly priced VPS from somewhere else), are you able/willing to expand upon the "niggles" comment?

Thanks

[Andy]

There are differences between private servers and dedicated. The main one as you mentioned is the hard disk. Now for a few quid extra you can get 25x the amount of disk space (and a dedicated disk at that) on a dedicated server rather than a private server.

The other advantage is that dedicated servers offer Windows, so if you're not Linux literate then thats a great thing (but windows costs £10 a month after the first 2 months, so be aware of that).

At the moment I've heard a lot of niggles with the private servers so I'd only recommend dedicated, even if it is only the base model Kimsufi (which run amazingly well I might add).

[Robtor]

I am thinking of sticking my site on a dedicated server here, and *maybe* try to run an application or two extra, basically as a hobby and I enjoy being a bit of a Jack of all trades with computers. A couple of questions though:

-I've never really been able to visualise the amount of computing power that would be required to host a site or two. To me it seems like a fairly miniscule amount would be required, can anyone give an idea of rough requirements? My current site http://www.anointed.org.uk is currently on a shared hosting, and is very, very slow during peak times for example, and in my mind for that to be the case it would have to be shared with absolutely loads of users.

-I noticed the private servers OVH offer. From what I understand this is exactly the same as the dedicated servers, but with a networked (and shared) hard drive. How much would this effect performance, as again, I fail to visualise it? Can anyone that has used both services give a slight performance comparison?

Apologise for the vagueness, essentially I like the idea of the Private Server, but if it's going to be slow due to a shared resource then it's to similar to shared hosting for me and i'll go dedicated.

Thanks for any advice.