4 ms·
I mean, I see VPS as the worst of both worlds. You're still managing a server, but now you're paying through the nose to do it. The costs just simply don't wo
by horsawlarway 5y ago
I mean, I see VPS as the worst of both worlds.
You're still managing a server, but now you're paying through the nose to do it.
The costs just simply don't work out nicely to anyone who can afford to buy at even small scales.
A 4 cpu, 8gb ram machine will pretty commonly run you $50 a month, with less than 200gb storage. You're paying 600/year for a machine that I can build (with better specs) for ~400.
Not to mention that the machine you buy yourself will have a lifespan of 3 to 8 years.
So sure - once you factor in bandwidth, storage location, power - you're probably not going to save money in the first year. But by year 2 you are, and by year 4 you've saved a considerable sum.
- aetherspawn 5y agoMy thoughts are same as above, and also -- if the app that you're hosting only runs on Windows -- then Windows VPS are really ridiculously expensive. Some providers charge around $30/mo for a key. You save a lot of money being able to buy/manage your own Windows keys. ATM we're running Windows under KVM and the performance is great anyway. But if you have to run a lot of Windows boxes, it seems like the cost effective way is to buy a Windows Server DC license ... then all the guest VM licenses are free, and with the right server hardware you can probably cram like 20 VMs on a single box.