Search results

Not a bad idea :)

My thoughts exactly. A service like theirs should not be able to bring in that level of profit.

+1 on this. Gotta love those all caps trouble tickets that roll in every now and then: "YOU STOLE FROM MY PAYPAL!"

Timely responses... not so much. We don't tend to rely on their helpdesk for much of anything.

Packet loss doesn't necessairly lead to a full outage. Packet loss also doesn't necessarily affect all customers. You could have a congested node on Comcast's network that affects a lot of end users and leads to packet loss, but you certainly wouldn't issue an RFO for that.

 ^^ This.

Completely agree. I also don't think you'll find a VPS provider willing to let a client occupy an entire drive in their presumably expensive high-performance node server for anything less than the price of a dedicated server. The opportunity cost of allocating an entire drive to a single client...

We offer Xen PV and HVM. All of my own personal VMs run Xen PV -- can't beat the performance and isolation combo.

Haha, yeah, wouldn't even cover the cost of electricity.

Throwing our discount VM brand into the hat: VPS Hosting Deal - $12 per year OpenVZ 128MB, $20 per year Xen 128MB. Seattle and Las Vegas locations.

That's the first thought I had too -- the list is nearly identical.

The whole discussion over there is borderline ridiculous. It is highly unprofessional for ChicagoVPS to take to a public forum like that to besmirch another provider. They come off looking like petulant children. The recurring examples of schadenfreude on hosting forums -- especially between...