Comments on: I’ve moved away from NFSN

By: masterbit

masterbit — Sat, 13 Apr 2013 20:36:33 +0000

I just have to chime in on this. I still use NFS.N for some stuff, but only because they happen to fill most of my important criteria where many others have failed and, frankly, because I can’t afford a dedicated server at the moment. Their web interface is a dream to work with, but the staff, while certainly in the know, are, for lack of a better word, downright bitchy if you happen to wrong them even slightly. Which isn’t at all a hard thing to do.

By: Andrew

Andrew — Fri, 17 Feb 2012 05:55:23 +0000

You were more than reasonable. One ssh session every five minutes might be unusual among their customers, but it does not represent any significant use of computing resources.

They are being ridiculous and technically absurd. Do they also rate limit your websites to one request per minute, or one per five minutes for SSL?

I always run my own servers, but I’ve heard good things about linode. Honestly though, I am pretty sure no other hosting co that offers shell access would give you any static about such a trivial thing.

By: Drew Crawford

Drew Crawford — Thu, 16 Feb 2012 07:24:54 +0000

EC2's main, most important, if-you-arent-using-it-you-are-doing-it-wrong, feature is HOURLY BILLING. If you dont constantly switch on and off from different sizes (and you spend a decent amount of cash) then dedicated is likely better for you.

cite. I don't scale in any meaningful capacity. A well-tuned lighttpd server with 256MB of RAM can easily sustain traffic the likes of the HN front page. You have to be serving a lot more expensive pages than I do to need that kind of power.

By: Rhema

Rhema — Tue, 14 Feb 2012 16:14:33 +0000

Have you looked into Amazon’s EC2?

Also, “reactive, kill first ask questions later” seems to nail down the recent US foreign policy pretty well.